School honor rolls under fire

[teach1st]

New Jersey.Com

Pat on the back or privacy violation? School honor rolls under fire

By MATT GOURAS
The Associated Press
1/24/04 12:44 PM

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) -- The school honor roll, a time-honored system for rewarding A-students, has become an apparent source of embarrassment for some underachievers.

As a result, all Nashville schools have stopped posting honor rolls, and some are also considering a ban on hanging good work in the hallways -- all at the advice of school lawyers.

After a few parents complained their children might be ridiculed for not making the list, Nashville school system lawyers warned that state privacy laws forbid releasing any academic information, good or bad, without permission.

Some schools have since put a stop to academic pep rallies. Others think they may have to cancel spelling bees. And now schools across the state may follow Nashville's lead.

http://www.nj.com/newsflash/national/index.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?a0526_BC_HonorRoll-Privacy

[Muddleoftheroad]

1. This is ridiculous

Schools are supposed to highlight good work so that other students know what to strive for.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

62. Wrong. Schools are supposed to teach critical thinking and a database.

The competition for grades teaches:
How to satisfy the power structure.
How to remain anonymous so others don't beat you for being different.
How to do the minimum required to get through unpunished.
How to appease the personality of the teacher giving the grades.

The competitive grade system is as destructive as the stock market system that causes companies to overstate their earnings to improve their stock value.

Quantitative evaluations corrupt the more human qualitative aspects of children. This is the source of the racist warring eco-destructive culture we live in.

My college history professor mother and her teacher friends sadly agree.

My SAT scores were in the top of the testing range. After I skipped 2nd grade, I became a social pariah and was never again allowed to play in the 'reindeer games' because of grade competition and other social stratifications.

The disconnect between human beings begins in school with children.
Believe it.

[Muddleoftheroad]

63. Ah the real world vs. the ivory tower

The real world wins hands down.

Yes, it is clear there is a disconnect, but most of that falls on the shoulders of academics who eschew ties to the world the rest of us live and work in.

In the real world, we use things like power structures and competitive grading. No, you don't have to remain anonymous. Quite the contrary actually. And if you do just the minimum, you will be found out and you will be unemployed. If you do it in a marriage, you will end up divorced.

Yes, getting along with the teacher is important. Getting along with others is always important, especially when you are assigned a task.

Quality and quantity both matter and both should be gauged. But students who are unable to perform in a real world environment are unduly coddled.

[Guaranteed]

2. LOL that's what we did at my high school

We spent all day ridiculing the stupid kids. The smart kids were SOOO cool. We relentlessly pummeled those dumb, pretty girls and stupid jocks.

[murielm99]

3. These idiot alarmists could handle this very easily

by having written policies about how honors are handled and promoted. That is what most schools do these days.

They do that to avoid lawsuits, too.

If they do cancel these things at your kids' schools, threaten to sue every time they have a football game or other sports event. Think of how awful it would be to have to congratulate the highest scoring kid in every game. It would violate that kid's privacy.

Get rid of student council. How dreadful it would be for everyone not elected to it, or not chosen as an officer!

No more National Honor Society. No more yearbook. No more band! Someone might be hurt if they do not get first chair.

Certainly no more homecoming court, or prom court!

I mean, let's be sensible here.

[DarkSim]

5. Heh he, brillian points.

"Good kill". I could not agree more.

[LiberalFighter]

29. Keep the newspapers away from the school athetic events

Require that all results not be reported to the media.

Oh... for wrestling if the results are reported.. require that the weight class an athlete wins or loses is not included in the results.

[DarkSim]

4. Where is our country's education heading????

First it's no Evolution, now this??? What is wrong with people nowadays...

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. This is NOT in the same category

of the anti evolution stuff. Bad analogy.

[teach1st]

6. Some things I'm not supposed to do in the class re privacy

Privacy issues are big. I can't display graded work - for example, I can't hang up the perfect spelling tests on a bulletin board. No students are to help me with paper management involving student work - remember the student helpers? I have to be very careful with what I say to students about their work and efforts in front of others. Did you ever have a teacher dump the contents of your messy desk on top of your desk as a hint to clean up? Can't do that! I'm not supposed to touch a student, not even on the shoulder, not even at times when a student really needs reassurance. I not supposed to be alone with a student.

[scarlet_owl]

9. Boy, things sure have changed since I was a teacher's aide.

We used to do daily hugs at the end of the day, not to mention holding kids' hands to trace letters. We would display all of the drawings the kids did and we would have them read aloud in class. Kids need the encouragement. If the children with lesser abilities parents really gave a damn, they would get involved with their child's schooling instead of going to lawyers first.

[Muddleoftheroad]

12. I understand the last part

About being alone. But why can't you display a perfect test. That's just stupid. Who gave you that rule, the school system or the NEA?

[teach1st]

18. The school system, I believe...

I'm unsure where the rule originated, but usually the restrictive stuff comes from our system.

I'm not sure how the NEA could influence student interaction in my classroom anyway. I believe they do recomment not touching and not being alone with students, though.

[markses]

13. Having taught at the University level

All of the things you list here make perfect sense to me:

1. Do not display actual work
a. without permission
b. with the real name of the student
c. with the grade and comments still included

If you want to use an example, get a clean copy. Luckily, I was teaching writing, so most students had clean copies on disk; I expect it would have been harder - or more artificial if I was teaching calculus, but then again, you have less need of student examples teaching claculus than writing, it seems to me.

2. No students managing the papers. Well, there are undergraduate TA's, but not in our department. Certainly no other student *in the class* could do any kind of paper organization or grade inputting - that's a big privacy no-no. In the context of the university, these privacy issues make sense. I wonder whether we're not "universitizing" the primary and secondary schools in accordance with a change in the the status of the individual student (as consumer, for instance).

3. Be careful what you say to students in front of other students. Well, that's just good pedagogy. I don't see this as a problem. It requires a bit of discipline, that's all. Even when students came up to me and asked specific questions during draft workshops, I would lower my voice and speak directly with them about their work. Same went for office hours, when there was a line outside the door. So what? It's part of your job.

4. Don't touch the students. This is a no-brainer. Just don't do it. What's the problem? I don't want people touching me at work, and the power relation between teacher and student is especially fraught and sexualized. Don't touch the students. It's axiomatic. I don't get the problem here at all.

5. Don't be alone with a student. Eh...I could go either way on this one. If you really want to cover yourself against accusations, you should always have some people around. If a student wanted to talk to me after class in the classroom, I would always make them walk over with me to my office, where there were more people around. This one isn't axiomatic, but it's pretty well suggested as a safety device. Problem is what again?

[teach1st]

17. Elementary is different

If you want to use an example, get a clean copy.

I stopped putting grades on papers. I use sticky notes for comments.

3. Be careful what you say to students in front of other students. Well, that's just good pedagogy. I don't see this as a problem. It requires a bit of discipline, that's all.

That's not what I'm talking about. What we might consider normal classroom conversation is too often held up for scrutiny. I was brought to admin once for telling a student "no" in front of others. (It was dropped, of course. The parent's case was that child with attention deficit should never be told no.)

4. Don't touch the students. This is a no-brainer. Just don't do it. What's the problem?

I could make the case that children need touch. This isn't college or high school. When I taught kindergarten and first grade, not touching was especially tough. I don't abide by the no touching restrictions (there are children who don't like touch, not even on the shoulder. I respect that, of course) - if I get sued, I get sued.

5. Don't be alone with a student. Eh...I could go either way on this one. If you really want to cover yourself against accusations, you should always have some people around. If a student wanted to talk to me after class in the classroom, I would always make them walk over with me to my office, where there were more people around. This one isn't axiomatic, but it's pretty well suggested as a safety device. Problem is what again?

Small classroom (a portable), lots of kids. If I'm being careful about what I say to a student in font of the class, common sense says I take the child outside the room for a talk. Of course, then we're alone.

Our litigation-happy society is making real teaching difficult at the elementary level, especially for males. To me, real teaching is important enough to risk lawsuits. But, I use other, though not fool-proof, strategies to deal with privacy and other issues. The most important is to make a concerted effort to build trust among my students and their parents. I'm usually OK, but it seems that each year the trust becomes more difficult to build.

[markses]

19. I'm sure things are far different in elementary education

I was just sharing experiences on this issue on a different level. I will respond to a few things here, however:

"3. Be careful what you say to students in front of other students. Well, that's just good pedagogy. I don't see this as a problem. It requires a bit of discipline, that's all.

That's not what I'm talking about."

In the first post, you said "about their work and efforts." I assumed that meant, well, about their work and efforts, and not merely saying "no" or other such supposed "therapeutic" violations. Clearly, one can't be asked to account for every idiosyncratic tendency among the students. You are not a trained psychologist, nor need you be. I assumed we were talking about something else.

"I could make the case that children need touch. This isn't college or high school. When I taught kindergarten and first grade, not touching was especially tough. I don't abide by the no touching restrictions (there are children who don't like touch, not even on the shoulder. I respect that, of course) - if I get sued, I get sued."

When I was typing my initial post, I kept thinking about K-2, and how hard it must be not to touch the students in these grades, even if only for herding purposes (yes, herding). I take your point.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

24. i agree markses

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. Great comments

I teach at the elem level and I have NEVER allowed kids to check each others' papers. I also never let a para or adult helper do this. That is MY job. Teachers who do this student checking say it is helping the kids, but I believe they are just too lazy to do it themselves. Kids shouldn't be checking papers or cooking the lunches or sweeping the floors either.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. correct thing to follow ....because some teachers do destroy

the spirit of "joy of learning" that is inherit in ALL children....i have seen it done over and over again and it is appaling!

this point should be adhered to:
"I have to be very careful with what I say to students about their work and efforts in front of others"


2 of my school age children are on the Superintendent's honor roll and are John Hopkins Tanented Youth Scholars and recieve upwards of 10 or more awards every year ....i went to the school board and asked them to NOT do this any more...because the children who work just as hard, if not harder for their C are NOT motivated by these honor ceremonies to do better but instead are humilated and discouraged. for some children like mine good grades come easy and they do not have to work hard for them while others fight tooth and nail and struggle daily for theirs....the admin. in my school looked at me as if i had three heads for not allowing my children to participate in the aslemby when honors are handed out! instead the school now mails them home.

BTW my children agree ...as a matter of fact they were the ones that brought it up. :shrug:....


we belong to the Alfie Kohn school of thought

[kath]

30. Yay for Alfie Kohn!!

I sure wish more people would read "No Contest" (and his other books are great as well). Unfortunately, things seem to be getting worse instead of better in this regard.

I hate those damned bumperstickers: "My Child is an Honor Student at _______ School).

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. The joy of learning

Give me a break. Society doesn't make excuses for second place. The world doesn't make excuses if you do your job only OK. Life demands hard work and doing a good job. If you don't excel, employers will and should fire you.

These traits you seem afraid of instilling are essential.

[markses]

34. That is most certainly a value

That is, a specific social interest. But we should admit that it has nothing to do with teaching any particular subject under consideration (mathematics, reading, writing, physics, or whatever). Rather, it "teaches" a particular mode of practice that is valorized in our society (i.e., the end-all and be-all status of "competition"). Once again, this is not a subject - strictly speaking - that we teach in school, there is no 5th period "competition class," in other words, but rather a specific way of being in society (that masquerades as general, or natural). So you agree that teachers should be in the business of teaching particular ethics, then?

And if particular ethics, why not OTHER ethics (say, an ethics in which cooperation trumps competition and collective effort trumps individual achievement)? One answer I've had to this is purely functional: Society runs by competition, so we should be hard-nosed realists about teaching that to kids early. Well, fine, but this assumes that society will never change out of this model - it assumes, that is, that this model is natural and necessary rather than a contingent social practice. Oh, the contradictions then start to multiply: If it is natural, why do we need to teach it? Wouldn't students default to it eventually? If it is not natural, then it would be precisely at the point of education that it is inculcated. If we don't inculcate it, society will change (over time, of course) into whatever other model is inculcated, thereby removing the necessity for "teaching it" in the first place.

[Muddleoftheroad]

36. We should NOT teach the opposite

By refusing to emphasize success and by coddling those who do not do well, we ignore reality.

As a former supervisor, I interviewed many who were taught this way. I never hired a one. I don't want someone who believes "C" work is acceptable. I don't want to work with that person and I sure don't want to count on him or her.

Our society IS based on competition. We are a modified meritocracy. Yes, there are lots of ways around merit, but they can catch up with you at the strangest times.

Collective effort is fine, as long as everyone puts forth effort AND results. I have found that there are always those who hide behind collective effort in an attempt to do no work at all.

[markses]

38. That's a nice restatement

But you certainly didn't answer even one of my objections.

[Muddleoftheroad]

40. Not true

I answered your comments. It doesn't matter that there is no "subject" called competition. It is essential to all subjects. It is essential to who we are and not a random ethic. You might not like it, but then perhaps you might choose another field of endeavor.

Again, as I said, cooperation is great as well. We do teach that in school, especially through athletics. But many hide behind group effort to avoid doing their own.

Maybe one day society will change. If it does, please feel free to teach whatever it decides then.

[markses]

41. Again

If it were "essential to who we are," it would not be necessary to teach it. Whether I like it or not is beside the point. (While none of this has anything to do with me, or you for that matter, I will note that I was quite a successful educator at the university level, at least judging from my student and colleague evaluations, and the progress I noticed in my own students, all of whom I cared for deeply.)

These are theoretical points that translate into practice. If one maintains that education instills the value of competition, one cannot turn around and say that it must do so because that is the way things are; clearly, the first proposition states that competition is PRODUCED as a social value, so the necessity of the second proposition cannot serve to ground the first. What you really want to say is that you LIKE competition as the driving factor in a social formation, that you think it is good, and that you will promote it above any other potential mode of social organization. To cover this preference and value up with the force of necessity is ideological obfuscation in the classical sense. Then, of course, the next move is even more slippery, arguing that success and drive is ONLY produced through competition (cooperation is here a derived and secondary *means* for the realization of the driving force), or that competition serves to ensure value and prevent "slacking." Well and good - I even agree - though this is market logic draped over the whole of human activity.

I have no problem with competition; it is sometimes useful, sometimes not. I do have a problem with educational philosophies (not a *random* ethic, but a contingent one to be sure) that urge reproduction of the social system above its transformation, that push competition as "the essential factor," and that drape a market logic over the rich potentialities for life.

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. Essential

Mathematics is essential, yet we teach it. Or at least we did. Science is essential. So is history. So is language. So are a host of other things.

We teach them all. Even more, we don't teach the opposite.

No, I maintain education MUST instill competition. It's not a question of whether I like it or not. It IS a driving force of our society. As such, teachers have an obligation to ensure our students are prepared for it.

[markses]

47. Okay

So you're using a non-technical definition of essential. You mean "important for functioning" in our particular social formation and not "of the essence" of human behavior (For if it were of the essence of human behavior, we wouldn't need to teach it). I would certainly agree with the first part; that is the contingency that I've been questioning all along.

Notice also that I never said it wasn't a driving force in our society. It clearly is. But the assumption is that our society cannot change. The problem emerges because the very thing that would change our society is what you preclude in "teaching" competition. This is the tightly bound ideology of the double bind, that says we must teach competition because our society is basically competitive, while our society is basically competitive because we must teach competition. Of course, what we are really saying, as I've been saying all along, is that we prefer competition to other models - that's the only way the double bind (which hides the moment of valuation) doesn't fall into infinite regress and incoherence.

You said in a previous post that when society changes, I should feel free to teach another model. Thanks for the permission, but I felt quite free to explore a variety of models with my students when I taught already. Luckily, we were able to avoid particular dogmas in the service of critical thought. And for critical thinking, even the sacrosant model of competition comes before the great panel of review. This seemed a greater service to my students than a cynical reproduction of the world as it - supposedly - is.

Finally, I'm not sure where you get this obsession with the "opposite." I never said anything about any opposite. I said "other," not opposite. Could it be that in the two-valued logic of competition, any other is an opposite? A particularly dangerous tendency which seems to spring to life in your very readings. Seems to me that we can learn to think differently, and that competition can often serve as a screen to such thinking.

[Muddleoftheroad]

53. Non-technical definitions

My God, where do you get this stuff?

Actually, buried among what appears to be the educate-ese of your post is that we do have societal norms now. To fail to teach those norms now leaves children unprepared for the world. As someone who has tried to hire such ivory tower products, I reject them. Employers across the land want nothing to done with them. They might be great people, but they are useless employees. The educational world leaves them unpreprared for life outside of school.

You don't need my permission to teach what you want. But if you teach in the public schools, then I do have some say in the curriculum. Alas, the American public has lost control of those systems, which is why so many flee them now.

It is not dogma to say that competition is essential to our society. It is fact. To refuse to teach that fact is a rebellion that might be fine for a teacher, but it will harm the students.

[markses]

54. Oh, I see

I'll stop that, then. I used one defintion of essential (that I take to be a technical term of art in philosophy), you used a different one (colloquial expression). Better?

At any rate, your post once again defaults to supposed hard-nosed "realism," (really little better than apologia for reproducing that real) and once again misconstrues what I said (since I never said one could or should "refuse" to teach the fact of competition).

Appeals to *social* fact become dogmatic when you take the systems that underlie and produce that *social* fact to be eternal and unchanging.

I never had a problem preparing students for the labor market. In fact, I was quite good at teaching precisely the kind of service courses (technical and professional communication) that did just that. But I took my major function to be teaching critical thinking, and that meant that even the current *social* facts were subject to critical review, including competition as a mode of social organization strictly speaking. When you give that up, you are in fact being dogmatic, however "realist" you may imagine your position.

I agree that one does great harm to students by painting a rosy picture of the struggles in advanced capitalism (hell, I work in corporate law now - I think I know a little something about competition as a social model!); at the same time, one does greater harm if one assumes that ALL you are doing is preparing students to sell their labor as commodity, or compete on the market in some other way. In that case, your so-called schools become little more than factories for producing workers, producing entrepreneurs, and producing the same, always the same. That's the problem with the so-called realist position: it can do everything but imagine something new.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

61. Social Darwinism=might makes right=NEOCON MACHIAVELLIANISM.

Public schools are where the brutality of authoritarian hierarchies are bred into our social and political life.

Once again, from the article by a former NYC and State Teacher of the Year about why schools are bad for students and the entire culture:

Conditioned response to authority allows war and war crimes(redundant.)
There is a regular post argument between du-ers with experience in the military and du-ers who revile militarism and abuse of power and can't imagine taking orders to kill from a corrupt power structure.
Vets react by declaring "I'm no brainless automaton. I'm hard-working, self-sacrificing and principled." There are difficult paradoxes inherent in saying "the problem is upstream in the command structure, not down here where we just take orders so we can feed our families."

Examination of social indoctrination in public education and the corporate government's need for obedient soldiers who are motivated by noble lies about "defending our freedom" reveals how war is perpetuated by participation and support from the very people who suffer the most from the fighting.

Prussian education tactics+Patriotism+Fundamentalism=Nazi America.

Read the 9/03 Harper's magazine essay by John Taylor Gatto, a former NYC and NY state Teacher of the Year, author of ‘The Underground History of Public Education.’

In an essay called 'How Public Education Cripples Our Kids and Why,' he details how Prussian culture was adopted when public education became widespread in the 1800s.
>snip<
"...compulsory schooling on this continent was intended to be just what it had been for Prussia in the 1820s: a fifth column into the burgeoning democratic movement that threatened to give the peasants and the proletarians a voice at the bargaining table.

Modern, industrialized, compulsory schooling was to make a sort of surgical incision into the prospective unity of these under classes...

The actual purpose of modern schooling...six basic functions:
1) THE ADJUSTIVE OR ADAPTIVE FUNCTION-
Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. This, of course, precludes critical judgment completely. It also pretty much destroys the idea that useful or interesting things should be taught, because you can't test for reflexive obedience until you know whether you can make kids learn, and do, foolish and boring things.

2) THE INTEGRATING FUNCTION-
This might well be called "the conformity function," because its intention is to make children as alike as possible. People who conform are predictable, and this is of great use to those who wish to harness and manipulate a large labor force.

3) THE DIAGNOSTIC AND DIRECTIVE FUNCTION-
School is meant to determine each student's proper social role. This is done by logging evidence mathematically and anecdotally on cumulative records. As in "your permanent record." Yes, you do have one.

4) THE DIFFERENTIATING FUNCTION-
Once their social role has been "diagnosed," children are to be sorted by role and trained only so far as their destination in the social machine merits-and not one step further. So much for making kids their personal best.

5) THE SELECTIVE FUNCTION-
This refers not to human choice at all but to Darwin's theory of natural selection as applied to what he called "the favored races." In short, the idea is to help things along by consciously attempting to improve the breeding stock. Schools are meant to tag the unfit-with poor grades, remedial placement, and other punishments-clearly enough that their peers will accept them as inferior and effectively bar them from the reproductive sweepstakes. That's what all those little humiliations from first grade onward were intended to do: wash the dirt down the drain.

6) THE PROPAEDEUTIC FUNCTION-
The societal system implied by these rules will require an elite group of caretakers. To that end, a small fraction of the kids will quietly be taught how to manage this continuing project, how to watch over and control a population deliberately dumbed down and declawed in order that government might proceed unchallenged and corporations might never want for obedient labor.

That, unfortunately, is the purpose of mandatory public education in this country...the Prussian system was useful in creating not only a harmless electorate and a servile labor force but also a virtual herd of mindless consumers."

Pretty horrifying, isn't it? I went to that school for sure. There is a concerted effort to re-militarize our culture to push back the cultural changes brought about by the Vietnam War horrors. The Glorious Lies need to be re-established and the draft will be back in 2005 after the election season.

Teach your children well.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

65. JOM, thank you! i have never read a more succinct description of the system

and its purpose nor a more accurate one ...i did some research into the DOD's participation in cirriculum development of the public education system :scared:

BOOKMARKED!
:yourock:

[GinaMaria]

78. That is the best post I've read in a while

Well done and Thank you.

[JoFerret]

50. Check Alfie Kohn out

- excellent perspective on this stuff, on the Leave No Child Untested Act and other aspects of education.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. I am a teacher too

and dumping the contents of a messy desk on top of a student's desk is demeaning and humiliating. Only a cruel teacher would do this. From your name, do I understand that you teach 1st grade? SHAME ON YOU.

I'll go along with the rest of your post, but not this.

BTW, my 4th grade teacher did something like this to me. She threw my stuff out on the floor and made me put it in the trash. Then the school got to buy me all new stuff and she lost her job at the end of the year. And guess what? I'm still messy and disorganized so this stunt didn't work. It just made me cry and made my parents and the principal mad.

Are you a parent? Ask yourself if you would want your own child's teacher to do this to your child. Public humiliation does not belong in a 1st grade classroom or ANY classroom, for that matter.

[teach1st]

49. Shame on me?

..and dumping the contents of a messy desk on top of a student's desk is demeaning and humiliating. Only a cruel teacher would do this. From your name, do I understand that you teach 1st grade? SHAME ON YOU.

Only a cruel teacher? Not true. Unthinking, maybe, or unaware teachers have done so. That doesn't make them cruel. I've done it before, but I wish I hadn't. I learned from my mistakes.

Besides, what makes you think I make a practice of that? I was giving examples so that people understand where privacy concerns are going in school.

I teach 5th grade now, but I began in kindergarten and moved on up the grades with classes.

(Edited because I'm used to vBulletin)

[proud2BlibKansan]

56. It was a bad example.

It shouldn't be okay to do this.

In my district, two teachers were fired last year for strip searching 3rd graders. This would be another example of invading privacy. But I would never use it to explain what is wrong with this 'no more honor roll' movement.

I completely understand why some folks think this is a stupid idea. But for eons, we have celebrated our high achievers in school without thinking of the effect this praise has on the kids who never get it. Kids who make the honor roll will probably always have success in life. We don't owe them anything but a good education. Besides, what is the big deal about being on the honor roll in elementary school?

So what do you do in your 5th grade class to keep your non-honor roll kids learning? I believe that everything we do to reach the kids who don't get it has a positive effect on every kid in the class. If my kids know I will do anything to help the kid who has never been a top student, they are getting the message that EVERY kid is important to me, not only the ones who make me look good.

[teach1st]

58. An example for non-teachers

..who could relate to it from their own school years. My point was that school has changed. Perhaps I should have been clearer that I didn't mean to assign approval or disapproval to any of the examples.

What do I do to keep all learning? Whatever it takes! I'm not always successful.

My class web site: http://www.pb5th.com

[proud2BlibKansan]

73. You still give spelling tests?

We have changed to 'individualized spelling'. It's part of '4Blocks' or where I work, we call it 'Balanced Literacy'. No more traditional spelling tests and I really don't miss them. We also don't use a basal reader anymore. We've had great success with this approach. Our kids reading levels have shot way up in the 5 or 6 years we have been been using Balanced Literacy.

[teach1st]

82. Maybe I'm just a throwback...

...on the other hand I don't have control of the curriculum.

I have to choose my battles. I refused to use SFA and in fact started a web site against it (I just closed the site, as it did it's job). I've never used a basal. Reading focus is my battle.

I will say that the remarks from some of the teachers here: "Shame on you" and "You still give spelling tests" are quite embarrassing.

[scarlet_owl]

7. Great. Everything else is being dumbed-down,

why not schools too?

[SoCalDem]

8. Boo-freakin'-Hoo

Honor rolls are a longstanding tradition, and I was happy to see my son on it.. His two brothers were not, but it did not cause problems.. They knew that he was the oone who really liked school (they did not)..

The ones who are "embarrassed", need to study harder or STFU :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

57. The ones who are embarrrassed

are often doing the best they can. They may have learning disabilities or other handicaps. Maybe their parents are getting a divorce or their grandparent just died. Telling them to work hard and "STFU" is not a practical solution at all. I hope you are not an educator.

[SoCalDem]

60. Some kids will never be on the honor roll, but that should not mean

that the kids who DO get the top grades, should be "ignored"..

A CEO makes 16Million a year..they guys who do all the actual work get maybe 40K.. That's not fair either.. Life is not fair, and grades have always been the currency of school...just as money is the currency of commerce..

The kids who are learning disabled, probably do not think they will be on the honor roll, so they are probably not disappointed..and if they DO make it, it's a real achievement..

and no I am not an "educator".. just a Mom of 3 grown up sons who are all successful.. 1 honor roll,, 2 "disgruntled students"..

[proud2BlibKansan]

76. I know lots of LD kids

who have made honor roll. Just because some of them think they won't is no reason to accept this as status quo. I see this attitude as an excuse for these kids to not even try. Ever hear of "Avoidance of Failure' theory? It says that some learners are so accustomed to failing that they won't even try. It's the 'why study when I know I'm going to flunk anyway' attitude.

[izzie]

10. I found this very odd.What is going on?

I went to a high school where about 5 kids in the class got all A's. Small class, so maybe 10 percent. Now that same high school has 50 percent getting all A's.Town has grown, so are they telling me only high IQ's have moved to the town or what? Maine's schools are not bad but this is just out of the question. By-the-way did anyone read Free Reb. on the new history teachings in Ala.? What is really funny is they blame it on liberals and if I know my history the Republicans and Christian right has controlled that state for years.Since when have liberals been running any Southern states?

[Pattib]

55. Could someone please explain when making the honor roll changed from..

having at least a 3.0 to this A and B honor roll B.S.?

My son is in his first year of college now but when we moved to Florida several years ago we discovered that if a student makes, for example five A's and one C you can not make the honor roll. What's up with that?

However, if you make straight B's then you make the honor roll. Is that silly or what? It happened to my son. In his freshman year of high school he had a 3.6 gpa. Five A's and one C and he was not on the honor roll. My friend in VA said it is the same for her children. What happened to the gpa? Are six B's better than 5 A's and a C?

[lostnfound]

11. Will they stop honoring athletes too? Makes klutzy kids embarassed?

This is part of the country's anti-intellectual climate, I think.

That, and perhaps an underlying (correct) sense that their kids are being judged and labelled like USDA beef -- except that the beef always gets an "A'.

[soup]

14. teach1st, I owe you an apology

My initial thought when I read this was 'bulls***'. After a search found 66 other news sources carrying this, I realized it wasn't a joke or an Onion piece.



Unfortunately, this article from July 10, 2002 isn't a joke, either:

The Supreme Court's ruling giving public school authorities the green light to conduct random, suspicionless, drug testing of all junior and senior high school students wishing to participate in extra-curricular activities, teaches by example. The lesson, unfortunately, is that the Fourth Amendment has become a historical artifact, a quaint relic from bygone days when our country honored the "scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual." (See West Virginia State Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 637 (1943)).

The Court's ruling turns logic on its head, giving the insides of students' bodies less protection than the insides of their backpacks, the contents of their bodily fluids less protection than the contents of their telephone calls. The decision elevates the myopic hysteria of a preposterous "zero-tolerance" drug war, over basic values such as respect and dignity for our nation's young people.
http://www.counterpunch.org/boire0710.html


Wasn't there a recent drug raid on a school, guns drawn, terrified students on the floor while a search was conducted?

Makes me wonder if next year we'll see such a raid searching for any child having an A+ science test where others could see it.


Another thought, will it now become illegal for schools to live up to the NCLB expectations? If one school's classification is better than another, doesn't that just serve to humiliate the school whose students aren't achieving?

edited to change a word.

[teryang]

15. Ever run into the use of lotteries

...in school administration. A program for high achievers will be noticed by the School Board for attendance at particular schools or in particular advanced programs, such as Science/math or college preparation, sometimes vocational such as music, arts, theater. Then the community establishment finds out that junior or missy didn't make the cut. The notice for the allocation of benefits is then ignored and a "random lottery" is conducted which includes everyone except D average and below students, regardless of ability. Miraculously, the unqualified sons and daughters of the community doctors, lawyers and preachers find the way into these limited programs while the most talented students who work their butts off get pushed aside.

I imagine the same people don't want anyone to know their kid is lazy or just a poor student.

[displacedtexan]

16. Let's hear it for the C MINUS STUDENT!

Rah! Rah! Go, Ws of the world!

[proud2BlibKansan]

74. Grades ARE NOT the point

learning is.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

20. RW talkingpoint meant to DISTRACT and a NON-ISSUE!.......nuff said

and me being an Alfie Kohn Disciple...this is NOT an issue

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. This is a non-issue?

Maybe to you, not to the rest of us.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

23. read my other post #21

[bleedingheart]

25. This is just so ridiculous...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

26. read "The Schools Our Children Deserve" by Alfie Kohn...........

it will enlighten many to this issue...Kohn presents a wonderful intellegent debate. Drawing on a remarkable body of research he helps parents and others interested in education understand the need to move beyond a "bunch o' facts" model of teaching. Using stories from real classrooms, he offers surprising insights as he shows how this can and must be done.

This book presents a fresh perspective on todays headlines about education -- and what our children will be asked to do in (bush*s "No Child Left Behind) class tomorrow morning.

It will make us rethink our most basic assumptions about schooling
Kohn and Wellstone were from the same "School of Thought" and friends.

Making students accountable for test scores works well on a bumper sticker and it allows many politicians to look good by saying that they will not tolerate failure. But it represents a hollow promise. Far from improving education, high- stakes testing marks a major retreat from fairness, from accuracy, from quality, and from equity.
- Sen. Paul Wellstone (1944-2002)

check out his site: http://www.alfiekohn.org/

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. Alfie Kohn said

that schools who participate in the Pizza Hut Book-It program are not creating better readers, they are only making fat children.

The problem with competition in school is that some kids never win. Rather than boosting the egos of the overachievers, we need to boost the achievement of the low achievers. The more attention we pay to perfect Paula, the less likely that poor Paul will even try. I have taught for 25 years and this is the reality. We are losing far more kids than any of you out there realize. They give up by 3rd grade because they have never scored 100% on the all-important weekly spelling test. And they become serious discipline problems. So we need to focus on the learning, not the goal of perfection.

How many of you who seem outraged by this have stopped to think about the kid whose parents don't have one of those bumper stickers on their car, the kid who never gets awards at school or wins medals in academic competitions? You need to because this is the profile of most of the kids who are choosing to bring guns to school and kill their peers and teachers. It's really a serious situation, not silly political correctness.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

59. and Alfie is absolutely correct on this......imho

Alfie Kohn and Jonathan Kozol are 2 men after this grandmothers heart :loveya:

[proud2BlibKansan]

66. Have you read Kozol's

SAVAGE INEQUALITIES? It is the best explanation of school financing and what's wrong with it that I have ever read. I highly recommend this book, especially to those who say we are 'throwing money' at education.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

79. yes it is! and i have read all of Kozol's books...genious and a rare gem

i agree he needs to be read by all :loveya:

also "Joey Pigza Swallowed The Key" and Joey Pigza Loses Control" by Jack Gantos....ought to be mandatory reading for all elementary school teachers, students and parents...a delightfully insightful look into the psyche of an LD kid and his world.

[reprobate]

27. This country is suffering from a severe psychosis.

Nothing makes sense here anymore. Just listen to the lawyers and we'll all go over the cliff.

[auburnblu]

28. Not surprising

This move towards not acknowledging any academic sucess to make everyone feel good is scary, but not surprising. Giving everyone a hug and saying its okay grades don't matter it only matters if you had fun today or if you feel positive. Guess what, countries like Japan, China, Germany and even those religious banning French will probably keep acknowledging academic achivement.

This is yet another example of why I would not send my kids to public schools, I think public universities are great, but public schools for k-12 worry me. What's next, should we ban this at the college level, i.e. no Dean's List, no class ranking.

[callous taoboy]

31. Given the fact

that the playing field has become increasingly uneven in public schools due to lack of funding for struggling students, I'm not so sure it's right to hold Johnny up with his good grades when his struggling peers aren't being given the help that they need to succeed. I see it here in our school.

[markses]

32. I'd like to see a pedagogical justification of posting top grades

Like so often, many of the posts seem to assume that posting or displaying top grades is good, simply because it is traditional practice. I suppose that's one justification, but can we construct a pedagogical justification? What is the teaching value of showing the good papers?

It seems to me that there are a few answers to this question.

1) It gives the other students a goal to strive for. But does it really? The goal is implicit in the act of grading itself. The goal is 100%, or an A, or whatever. One doesn't need to show that others have attained said goal to PROVIDE that goal - the goal is there at the outset.

2) To display that achievement is *possible*. This seems like a legitimate motivational goal. I'm not sure it serves a pedagogivcal purpose outside of its motivational aspects (yes, we know this is a hard distinction to make).

3) To praise students who have achieved. This seems like a legitimate motivational effect (insofar as it operates according to a reward structure), but it is not necessarily a pedagogical effect. One can praise a student, or at least point out what was done correctly as well as incorrectly - we've known this to be sound teaching for quite some time. The question is whether the posting of papers has anything to do with pointing out correct application. The converse seems to be what parents are responding to: if you are merely praising students, are you implicitly blaming other students? I think this is a harder case to make than a pure pedagogical case against displaying good papers.

I'm not sure it serves a particular pedagogical purpose - other than the fetishized "self-esteem" arguments that permeate education discourses like a poison gas. The problem is that those against displaying good grades do so on the same ground: self-esteem. It should be argued on pedagogical grounds - both pro and con, instead of getting into the stupid self-esteem track that has basically infected and ruined discussions of pedagogy.

Here's why I showed papers in class - the good, the bad, and the average: As prompts and examples for learning. So, for example, we'd read a chapter on writing evaluation arguments, then we'd look at some sample arguments from previous classes. The names and other identifying characteristics would always be changed. The question would never be "Is this good or bad?" but "Does this paper successfully accomplish some feature of an evaluation argument (say, setting up criteria that will work for a given audience)?" How so? Show us where. If not, what falls down for you? Point to it. How could it have been done better? What criteria do you think are more appropriate for the situation, and why? Etc. In other words, I only displayed previous work for pedagogical purposes, the idea being that students would be able to turn their observations into concrete action. It was never a "self-esteem" thing one way or the other. I just don't see the pedagogical purpose in stapling a bunch of 100% spelling tests on a bulletin board. It simply doesn't TEACH anyone anything.

[teach1st]

35. I never have posted just A or perfect papers...

...although it can motivate, I think. But there has to be other motivations.

I think it's important to point out progress and effort, too. The child who comes in my class very low can still make tons of progress - that progress should be acknowledged.

Touchy subject here. I don't really think grades are necessary, but they are the currency we use in my district, whether I like them or not. The parents know what they mean, the kids know what they mean, and they do motivate.

However, I think it's wise for teachers (in elementary at least) to help students go beyond doing well simply for the grades. I try to promote learning just for the joy of learning. Sounds easy, but in practice it's quite a challenge, at least with my student population, and especially when high stakes scores are all that matters to the powers that be.

I've had teachers ask me why I teach so much social studies when it isn't on the FCAT (Florida's high stakes test). Sheesh!

(Edited to wipe out grammatical errors)

[markses]

43. You will get no argument from me on the issue of those tests

Those tests are a disgusting farce, and students are very poorly served by them. If anything, they teach students NOT TO THINK. They're hideous.

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. What state tests are you referring to?

I teach in Missouri and we have a very good criterion refernced, performance based state assessment. I agree that the Iowa, Stanford and other norm referenced, multiple choice fill in the bubble tests are horrid. We unfortunately still have to give the SAT-9 in MO for the feds. But the M.A.P. is a great test, written and scored by teachers. Check it out. MODESE.com

[JoFerret]

37. Egg sorting. Diversionary tactics

and completely missing the issues of motivation and recogniton for effort. This is nonsense. Honor rolls are silly. So is making them a big issue. Schools should be required to help all students see themselves as worthy, and that everyone is capable of striving further. Honor rolls tend to institutionalize mediocrity for those who find it easy. It is all missing the big issues of equity and effort. Egg sorting.

[RememberTheCoup]

39. You are all missing the point.

The writer of this article has done a good job of mixing up two completely separate issues. In fact, the article does reveal the real reason the Nashville schools stopped posting grades, and it is actually in the snippet contained in the first post in this thread: "{Tennessee} state privacy laws forbid releasing any academic information, good or bad, without permission." However, that reason is apparently not interesting enough for this writer, so he feels the need to throw in a whole separate angle about whether the posting of honor rolls (and similar practices) is harmful to students who don't make the list. Personally, I think it is and that it serves no good educational purpose, BUT the only reason schools stopped doing this is that it violated state privacy laws. Note, "School officials are developing permission slips to give parents of the Nashville district's 69,000 students the option of having their children's work recognized. They hope to get clearance before the next grading cycle -- in about six weeks at some schools." Also, "The problem appears unique to Tennessee, since most states follow federal student privacy guidelines, which allow the release of such things as honor rolls, U.S. Department of Education officials said." But, take my word for it, the right-wing spin will be that the whining parents of underachievers caused this to happen, that it will soon become a nationwide trend, and that liberals won't be happy until we have destroyed public schools in our never-ending quest to "force" equality on students even if it means diminishing individual gifts and accomplishments.

[hatrack]

42. Back in 1997, 85% of all Duke undergraduates were honor roll students

If that isn't a de facto abolition of the honor roll, I don't know what is.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

44. LMAAO...or it could've been something in the water

[markses]

45. I had a professor in college

Who had a "curve" for the class (it was an upper level philosophy course with about 45 students). Only 7 people in the class would get an "A," he stated. Now, this is of course common in the sciences, but this was a humanities class and the grading would be done on the basis of an essay midterm, an essay final, and a 15 page term-paper. When he announced this on the first day, there was an uproar in the class - many students complained, and tried to argue out of it (philosophers, you see!). He told the following story:

"When I was in the Navy, you had to pass a physical activity or fitness test every few months or so, and they would be graded as follows: Outstanding, Excellent, Good, Adequate, Fair, Poor. Soon it became apparent to me that everyone was scoring 'Outstanding' on these tests; if you received a score of 'Excellent,' it meant you were virtually incapable of movement. The curve will remain, even if I'm a just a small part of destroying such nonsense."

I never said a word, convinced as I was that i would be one of those 7 A's. And I was.

(Yeah, I know - pretentious self-congratulation, but I been tellin' it like that for years, so I'm sticking to it!;-))

[AlFrankenFan]

51. Just goes to show you...

...how in the real world, being able to program a VCR clock makes you a social outcast.

This is just a step in the dumbing down of America - and it's starting at the source :(

[NashVegas]

64. Good God - It GETS WORSE

http://tennessean.com/education/archives/04/01/46042500.shtml?Element_ID=46042500

Here's a reading skill that Metro schools say your child should have by the end of the third grade: Continues to acquire, develop and demonstrate understanding of vocabulary and symbols related to materials read and concepts learned.

Tying Nashville Together wants that translated into plain English.

''We're just saying, 'Can we have this written in a way that is meaningful?' '' TNT member Elois Freeman said. ''We really want to bridge this gap of lack of communication.''

I have a better idea: instead of trying to get a school district to dumb down it's literature for parents, maybe they should consider joining the ranks of literacy volunteers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

69. I see nothing wrong

with the wording of this objective. TNT members in TN must be as whiny and illiterate as the union teachers where I work. Now the whole country knows how stupid they are. Great PR, TN teachers!

[rman]

87. "Continues to acquire" etc is no standard of skill,

it doesn't say anything about required skill level, essentially it only says the student is supposed to progress.
While it's supposed to be about measuring reading skill.

[sendero]

67. One wonders sometimes....

... I can understand the point being made, a little - but where does it end?

Dissolve all sports teams because those who don't make the team feel bad? (BTW, I never made any team in HS, I tried once :))

I have 3 sons. One is doing very very well academically. He is not really a competitive person IMHO. Another does well when he wants to. The third is learning-disabled (as well as other problems) and struggles to learn to read and do math (he is doing better than we dared hope, thanks to Kumon).

I would not dream of hiding the academic successes of others for the benefit of my struggling son. This isn't something that will help him grow into a functioning adult in the long term.

I think a lot of these PARENTS are the problem - they cannot accept that their spawn isn't the "excellent best". Shame on them.

[slackmaster]

72. As an Honor Roll member I have this to say to the underachievers

Go start your own club.

:nopity:

[proud2BlibKansan]

77. They already have

it's the 'I am going to bring a gun to school and shoot all the goodie goodie kids' club.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

80. exactly!..P2BL the lone voice crying in the wilderness on this thread

but i hear ya and thank you for speaking up for the majority of the children across this country that may sadly draft a list of "people to kill":(


:yourock:

[Loonman]

75. Big whoop, I made the roll one time in 4 years

Kids today must be overly sensitive namby-pamby wimps, these days.

[Buffler]

81. Bingo!

Kids today must be overly sensitive namby-pamby wimps, these days

I call it the Pussification of America.

And PC run amuck.

Some childrens sports leagues have even gotten rid of scores so there is no winner or loser. Wouldn't want the losing teams kids self esteem to be damaged.

[October]

83. I'm having mixed feelings

My daughter, who is always on the honor role, feels it would be unfair to not have one. She feels good when honored in this way -- and wants to work hard to stay on that list. But is it because it's a "public" list, or because she wants good grades? Both.

The honor role is sent to us in the mail -- in our school district's newsletter (and it's published in local papers). I admit to being a bit uncomfortable with this because I honestly felt that it was none of my business whether Johnny or Suzy Neighbor made the grade. I felt embarrassed to know who got all A's, and who didn't make the cut. We have a small school system here. I also don't like the idea that all my neighbors know where my kids stand -- even though they're on the list!

Plus, one of my daughter's friends doesn't do so well with his grades. He never fails, but one "c" will keep you off the list. Anyway, he's a really bright kid, a gifted actor (Played Romeo at age 12.), and is a delightfully mature young man. Yet -- the system can't "grade" those things.

It's worthy of discussion.

[Muddleoftheroad]

84. The system does grade those things

Kids who play "Romeo" at age 12 get the acclaim of the audience. Those who are more athletically gifted, get the acclaim of the crowd. Those who are scholastically gifted should get the acclaim of those who care.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

85. i know how you feel all of my kids make the grade too but i am still ...

against it and had the school refrain from including my children in any public award ceremonies in asembly at the school on moving up day...they think me a queer duck :7 ...but my children have good grades because they have a true JOY of learning not for the competition of it...

who was it? Graham...no no...it is Gardner who teaches that there are 7 types of genious? and i tend to believe this too

i am happy to see that you have a good and open mind and you are right, it is "worthy" of much needed discussion

[rman]

86. cancel all tests, exams. bad grades may embarrass underachievers

and we can't have that, can we.

[gasperc]

88. more evidence of dumb muscle jocks, ruling by force

this was no doubt pushed by parents of "star" athletes embarrassed by the utter stupidity of thier kids