Blame game in K-12 education

Premise: The US performs poorly international math tests, TIMSS and PISA

The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. TIMSS is used to compare over time the mathematics and science knowledge and skills of fourth- and eighth-graders. TIMSS is designed to align broadly with mathematics and science curricula in the participating countries.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2009001

Overall, the US came in tenth among four graders and ninth among eight graders.

On the PISA test, the United States came in 25 out of 35.   China, which did best on the test, cited “China also raised teacher pay and standards and reduced rote learning, while giving students and local authorities more choice in curriculum.”

Comments from the big shots.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan, “The results show that U.S. students must improve to compete in a global economy. … This should be a massive wake-up call to the entire country.”

Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates urged top U.S. public- school officials to overhaul teacher pay, saying on Nov. 19 that instructors should be rewarded for results rather than seniority or advanced degrees.

U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee: “ .... Average won’t help us regain our global role as a leader in education. Average won’t help our students get the jobs of tomorrow. Average is the status quo and it’s failing our country. This is clearly an issue we need to tackle in the next Congress ... ”

Tom Loveless, "I don't believe they've done their homework. PISA is inappropriate to be used as a benchmark, until these errors are addressed,” citing the PISA test is not tied to school curriculum. That means PISA doesn't measure what schools teach; it measures real-world application, or what kids can do after schools have taught them.

The guiltless.   All these players are well intended hoping to do no harm.

• Federal Government – generally sets its version of educational policy primarily through funded grant topics.  Currently the Feds support the Common Course Curriculum
• State - generally sets its version of educational policy through directives to individual school districts, funding topics, and issues of testing.  A vast majority have signed onto the Common Course Curriculum.
• Unions – do what unions do: represent their members as to workforce issues, workplace issues, and teacher security
• Schools administration -  generally implements state policies with an eye toward its teacher core and what it views can be achieved
• Principals – generally principals are held in high regard by teachers, and they enforce and endorse district policies.
• Math Coordinators – these  people do their best to help teachers needing any sort of help in the classroom with regard to pedagogy and content
• Teachers – have a mixed array of teaching talent.  We have any algebra 1 teachers that cannot teach algebra 2.  The difference between these course is so slight, this is incredulous.
• Preservice teachers- regularly preservice teachers are coached on how to teach fractions.  Often they fractions are proved to be challenging to their understanding of fractions themselves.  My gosh, preservice teachers have seen and studied fractions since the third grade.
• Colleges of Education – mostly specialize in pedagogy owing to the fact that  most faculty do not know much math. Few specialize in teaching high school math courses. Grades given are extraordinarily high.
• Parents – The innocents in the process.  But they don’t quite know just the level of competence of the teachers of their children.
• Students – usually unmotivated in both math and science.  Evidence indicates their interest dramatically declines in middle school.  This possibly accounts for low performance on the PISA test.  Many students do not see and equation between learning math and success in any career options. Moreover, many believe class time is the same as their study time.

The guilty.  None of the above.  The blamees are all are impersonal – the perfect targets.

• Curriculum – The perennial “whipping boy” for failure in the schools has long been the curriculum.  So, states seeing the failure of their schools change the curriculum.  Texas did this a few years ago, and a consortium of well over 40 states has produced the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).  They are now in the implementation stage.  Although the Common Core standards are supposed to be voluntary, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan last year (2010) made adopting the frameworks a condition of state eligibility for $4.35 billion in federal Race to the Top grants.  Note, these standards are currently not tested and not validated. They carry only the imprimatur of this Council of States.  There are no end-of-course examinations, no clarifying examples, and little by way of curriculum design.   Naturally, not everyone agrees.  The disagreement comes substantially from higher education that maintains the new Standards are insufficient for producing college ready students.   The most organized disagreement comes from yet another Council of folks. (See http://www.k12innovation.com/Manifesto/_V2_Home.html.) 
• Assessment types – There are many types of assessment.  Education devotees insist the standard type of high-stakes tests do not measure accurately student performance.  What are we testing for?  PREDICTION, EVALUATION, DIAGNOSIS, SCREENING?  Any of these?  Are we aking formative or summative?  Indeed, we seem to be testing to evaluate teachers and districts.  This is exactly the wrong applications of testing results.
• High stakes tests – these tests are here to stay.  Students and adults take them for every level of achievement. schools, private sector, and government sector.  It turns out that most education types now believe them to be an aspect of education; their exception seems to be how the results of these tests are used.
• Not enough money – Many of the more successful countries participating in the TIMSS and PISA tests cite that their pay structure is high relative to other professions.  So, naturally, many recommend more pay as a remedy.  This card has been played many times over the years, and the US now outspends per student all other in the thirty four member Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, countries.  Indeed for all educational services, the US spends more than each of the OECD average for each of primary, secondary, and tertiary education, excepting Luxembourg. (See, http://www.oecd.org/home/) As well, the number of US students completing secondary education and accessing tertiary education has averaged about 75% over the last decade, more than 5% on average lower than the OECD average.  If that isn’t enough, projected graduation rates for 2008 in Tertiary-Type A (i.e. four-year degree) campuses for the US is about 38%, ranking the US at number sixteen.

The remedies:

• We now have a new Core Curriculum State Standards (CCSS).  There is much work to be done on assessment and the nature of high stakes tests.  As well, there is the horrifically expensive Professional Development component required to bring teachers into align with the new curriculum. There is currently a juggernaut of efforts to bring the CCSS standards a reality.  Even still, those PISA successful countries indicate teachers have broad discretion on curriculum matters.

• Assessment types - the multiple choice test now widely used is about the only practical way to assess student knowledge.That is, without horrific costs. 
• Money - we've tried this.  Many of the more successful countries participating in the TIMSS and PISA tests cite that their pay structure is high relative to other professions.  So, naturally, many recommend more pay as a remedy.  More money still?  Consider the flip side.  The poor teachers now in the system, seeing a much bigger paycheck, will stay on.  Poor preservice teachers will continue toward their certificate.   Believe me, poor teachers are not having a good time in the classroom – despite the fact they may not know they are poor teachers. 

Conclusions:

1. Without the international tests that make bare the USA under performance in mathematics (and science) learning of our K-12 students,  the educational establishment would certainly draw the conclusion of excellence of our system.  
2. What Unions must accept is that they are not only in the business of protecting their members, but also are involved with serving the public good.  Public service unions do not enjoy the simple and traditional model of corporate vs. worker issues.  The public good is a factor.  Both schools and unions should not exploit the public good.  What Schools administrations should do is publish and open to hearings any measures they agree upon with unions as precisely how they propose to fund any considerations given and/or why they have disallowed sundry union demands.   The public good is a factor.  Teachers are caught in the middle.
3. Teachers must simply learn more math – not limiting their commitment to repeating what they did the previous year, not limiting their teaching to pre-scripted lesson plans, not limiting their knowledge to what they can remember from college.
4. Students must take more responsibility for own learning.  So many students have the attitude, “I’m here, now teach me.”
5. Parents need to support schools and insist on high standards of excellence from both their children and from the teachers.
6. The simple fact of the matter is that poor performance by the US on international math tests has laid bare the failure of its educational system.  Education types are frantically trying to target blame while trying to repair our egregious results - now embarassingly available to the world. The problem(s) is not an inch deep and a mile wide like the curriculum if oft reported to be, but rather a mile deep and a mile wide.  How many wake-up calls does it take?