Displaying posts categorized under

EDUCATION

Copying Singapore’s Math Homework The world needs a network of organizations to help countries learn from each other’s education systems. By Wendy Kopp

Ms. Kopp is the founder of Teach For America and CEO and co-founder of Teach For All, a global network of independent organizations working to expand educational opportunities in 40 countries.

Every three years, hundreds of thousands of teenagers in dozens of countries take an exam that tests their knowledge in science, math, reading, collaborative problem solving and financial literacy. The most recent results, issued this week, provide rich data for determining whether countries’ education systems are high-performing, making progress, or lagging behind. The PISA test is administered by the Program for International Student Assessment, a project of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Here are a few of the success stories from the current report: In Australia, immigrant students perform as well as other children. In South Korea, students from lower-income families perform on a par with wealthier peers. In Vietnam, the academic performance of girls and boys is roughly equitable. And Qatar experienced the fastest progress in math, while Georgia experienced the fastest progress in science.

Unfortunately, experience shows that most countries, including the U.S., fail to make the most of the PISA data. Even though PISA shines a light on policies and practices driving high performance and meaningful progress, only sporadic, ad hoc and generally bilateral opportunities exist to carry knowledge of what’s proving successful in one country to other parts of the world. Most countries write off the opportunity to learn from the highest-performing countries, since they are far away and seem very different. What can the U.S. or Chile, for example, learn from Singapore or Estonia—and vice versa?

The answer is almost certainly a great deal. For an issue like education—which is of enormous importance to global development—this absence of a global approach for fostering the exchange of ideas and best practices is an anomaly. Other global issues such as public health and the environment have robust channels and funding mechanisms for spreading best practices. In education, innovative ideas and new approaches that could benefit students on the other side of the world rarely see the light of day beyond a particular place. CONTINUE AT SITE

Sanctuary Campuses How the safety of students and faculty are compromised to achieve the leftist agenda. Michael Cutler

Two disturbing articles focusing on “Sanctuary college campuses,” serve as the predication for my article today.

On November 22, 2016 “The Atlantic” published, “The Push for Sanctuary Campuses Prompts More Questions Than Answers: It’s not clear how far colleges would or could go to stop the deportation of students.”

This article detailed how some “Sanctuary” colleges will not cooperate with immigration authorities.

Consider this excerpt from this article:

“Faculty at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, who would like to see the school become a sanctuary campus, met on Monday with administrators to “have a better sense of what their expectations are for a sanctuary campus,” said Joanne Berger-Sweeney, the school’s president. Her faculty expressed interest in the school declining to pass immigration information to federal authorities, and in establishing a network of alumni who are willing to offer pro bono legal help to undocumented students.”

On December 1, 2016 the website, “The College Fix” posted, “UC President Napolitano to campus cops: Don’t enforce federal immigration law.”

Here is are salient excerpts from this article:

Napolitano — who served as Secretary of Homeland Security under the Obama administration, charged with protecting the nation’s borders — put out a statement Wednesday that her office will “vigorously protect the privacy and civil rights of the undocumented members of the UC community and will direct its police departments not to undertake joint efforts with any government agencies to enforce federal immigration law.”

The announcement comes as students in the country illegally and their peer allies are distraught that there might be mass deportations of undocumented students under a Donald Trump presidency. Many student leaders have announced their schools are “sanctuary campuses.” Now campus leaders are essentially following suit.

According to Napolitano’s office, there are about 2,500 undocumented students enrolled across the 10-campus UC system.

“While we still do not know what policies and practices the incoming federal administration may adopt, given the many public pronouncements made during the presidential campaign and its aftermath, we felt it necessary to reaffirm that UC will act upon its deeply held conviction that all members of our community have the right to work, study, and live safely and without fear at all UC locations,” Napolitano stated.

“Education – The Selection of Betsy DeVos” Sydney M. Williams

There is nothing more ferocious than a cornered animal. That description fits the leaders of the two major teachers’ unions – the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). Both lashed out when Donald Trump nominated Betsy DeVos to take on what is perhaps the toughest and most important job in the new Administration – Secretary of the Department of Education. Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the NEA, said: “By nominating Betsy DeVos, the Trump administration has demonstrated just how out of touch it is with what works best for students, parents, educators and communities.” Randi Weingarten, president of the AFT, was blunter: “In nominating DeVos, Trump makes it loud and clear that his education policy will focus on privatizing, defunding and destroying public education in America.” The irony is that those two have stood in the way of reform. It is time the status quo is challenged. A good education, next to family, is the most critical element in determining future success and happiness. For too long, unions have focused on teachers and administrators, not students and parents. This has been especially true in those districts most in need of help.

Both unions had a financial stake in the defeat of Mr. Trump. Based on data through October 28, the NEA had contributed $23.3 million to political causes in 2016, with 98% going to Democrats. The AFT had given $10.3 million, with 100% going to Democrats. Both have a stake in maintaining what is not working. Studies suggest that 40% of high school graduates are not prepared for college, and that 20% are not qualified to serve in the armed forces. Something is wrong. Albert Einstein once famously defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Throwing good money at bad schools, with no little or no choice for parents and students and little or no accountability on the part of teachers and administrators has not worked.

Betsy DeVos is the person chosen to breach those walls – walls that thus far have proven invincible. Her selection by Mr. Trump shows that he is serious about reform. She has been trashed by those who see her as a threat, not only the heads of the two unions who have the most to lose, but reporters as well. Valerie Strauss, an education reporter for The Washington Post used incendiary language in an article titled, Trump terrifies public school advocates with education secretary pick. She claimed that Ms. DeVos’s proposals would promote segregation, discriminate against students with severe disabilities and fight public oversight. The implication was that Mrs. DeVos would destroy public education. Reporters for The New York Times, Kate Zernike and Kevin Carey, were equally provocative. Neither reporter mentioned unions, nor did they see any value in competition, choice, or accountability when it comes to education and teachers.

Not All the News That’s Fit to Print College newspapers display anti-Israel bias on behalf of Palestinianism. Richard L. Cravatts

When Elmer Davis, director of FDR’s Office of War Information, observed that “. . . you cannot do much with people who are convinced that they are the sole authorized custodians of Truth and that whoever differs from them is ipso facto wrong” he may well have been speaking about editors of college newspapers who have purposely violated the central purpose of journalism and have allowed one ideology, not facts and alternate opinions, to hijack the editorial composition of their publications and purge their respective newspapers of any content—news or opinion—that contradicts a pro-Palestinian narrative and would provide a defense of Israel.

The latest example is a controversy involving The McGill Daily and its recent astonishing admission that it is the paper’s policy to not publish “pieces which promote a Zionist worldview, or any other ideology which we consider oppressive.”

“While we recognize that, for some, Zionism represents an important freedom project,” the editors wrote in a defense of their odious policy, “we also recognize that it functions as a settler-colonial ideology that perpetuates the displacement and the oppression of the Palestinian people.”

A McGill student, Molly Harris, had filed a complaint with the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) equity committee. In that complaint, Harris contended that, based on the paper’s obvious anti-Israel bias, and “a set of virulently anti-Semitic tweets from a McGill Daily writer,” a “culture of anti-Semitism” defined the Daily—a belief seemingly confirmed by the fact that several of the paper’s editors themselves are BDS supporters and none of the staffers are Jewish.

Of course, in addition to the existence of a fundamental anti-Semitism permeating the editorial environment of The Daily, there is also the core issue of what responsibility a newspaper has to not insert personal biases and ideology into its stories, and to provide space for alternate views on many issues—including the Israeli/Palestinian conflict—in the opinion sections of the paper.

At Connecticut College, Professor Andrew Pessin also found himself vilified on campus, not only by a cadre of ethnic hustlers and activists, but by fellow faculty and an administration that were slow to defend Pessin’s right to express himself—even when, as in this case, his ideas were certainly within the realm of reasonable conversation about a difficult topic: the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Central to the campaign of libels waged against Pessin was the part played by the College’s student newspaper, The College Voice.

In August of 2014, during Israel’s incursions into Gaza to suppress deadly rocket fire aimed at Jewish citizens, Pessin, a teacher of religion and philosophy, wrote on his Facebook page a description of how he perceived Hamas, the ruling political entity in Gaza: “One image which essentializes the current situation in Gaza might be this. You’ve got a rabid pit bull chained in a cage, regularly making mass efforts to escape.”

The Twin Pillars of Progressive Prejudice Universities and the media: arrogant, ignorant, and ripe for reform By Victor Davis Hanson

In media land, Donald Trump is a reckless tweeter; Barack Obama’s outreach to GloZell and rapper Kendrick Lamar is just kicking back and having fun (Lamar’s latest album portrayed the corpse of a judge to the toasting merriment of rappers on the White House lawn). In media land, Donald Trump risked world peace by accepting a phone call from the democratically elected president of Taiwan; Barack Obama’s talks with dictators and thugs such as Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, and Raul Castro were long overdue. In media land, jawboning Carrier not to relocate a plant to Mexico is an existential threat to the free market; not so when Barack Obama tried to coerce Boeing to move to Washington State to produce union-made planes, or bullied a small non-union guitar company, or reordered the bankruptcy payouts of Chrysler and essentially took over the company.

In campus land, the election of 2008 was cause for ebullition; in 2016, elections by nature were traumatic as students were reduced to whining toddlers who needed cookies and milk.

(Note that campus post-election micro-parenting is not extended to departing students when they are hit with huge student-loan totals. Then they suddenly morph from helpless teenagers to full-fledged adults who must pay up what they borrowed to the colleges that did not educate them. Offering cookies and “caring” are a lot cheaper than not collecting overdue loans.) In campus land, federal laws should be rendered null and void — as in 1861 (over slavery) or 1961 (over racial integration of schools) — as colleges see fit; Donald Trump is a near fascist for wanting carry out the oath of his office by enforcing all federal statutes against states’-rights subversion.

The university and the media share two traits: Both industries have become arrogant and ignorant. We have created a climate, ethically and professionally, in which extremism has bred extremism, and bias is seen not as proof of journalistic and academic corruption, but of political purity. The recent election, and especially its aftermath, embarrassed journalists and academics alike — and should not be forgotten.

In the aftermath, they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing, as they insist that the popular vote alone should have mattered, that the Russians stole the election, that there was voting fraud, but only in the swing states Trump won, or that Democrats did not emphasize identity politics enough — anything other than the truth that a now municipal Democratic party is run by apartheid coastal elites and fueled by identity politics, and that journalists and professors cannot keep society’s trust.

Global Survey Finds Little Progress in Science Education High-school students in Singapore and Japan lead the rankings and there is little evidence that higher spending on education is improving results, according to the OECD By Paul Hannon

High-school students in many parts of east Asia continue to have a better command of science and other subjects than their counterparts in the rest of the world, but there is little sign that increased spending on education is producing better results in most countries.

That is a worrying development for the long-term economic outlook, since most economists believe that growth is partly driven by improvements in education levels—or what they call human capital—although the strength of the relationship is uncertain.

Students in Singapore had the highest average score in science, followed by their counterparts in Japan, Estonia, Taiwan and Finland, in triennial testing of 540,000 15-year-olds across 72 countries and regions during 2015. The U.S. ranked 25th, ahead of France but below the U.K. and Germany.

While the rankings have changed slightly since the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development last conducted its examinations under the Programme for International Student Assessment in 2012, the most arresting outcome is that higher spending on schooling around the world is having little impact on outcomes.

Scientific understanding was the focus of the third iteration of PISA in 2006. Since then, smartphones have become ubiquitous, while social media, cloud-based services, robotics and machine learning “have transformed our economic and social life,” said OECD Secretary General Ángel Gurria.

“Against this backdrop, and the fact that expenditure per primary and secondary student rose by almost 20% across OECD countries over this period, it is disappointing that, for the majority of countries with comparable data, science performance in PISA remained virtually unchanged since 2006,” he said.

One feature of weak global growth over recent years has been very low rates of productivity growth, in both developed and developing countries. The PISA results suggest stalled progress in educational attainment may be partly responsible.

School Bans Students from Raising Their Hands to Answer Questions Why not let teachers decide what method works best for their classrooms? By Katherine Timpf

Samworth Church Academy, a high school in Nottinghamshire in the U.K., has banned its students from raising their hands to answer questions because it is unfair to students who do not raise their hands.

In a letter explaining the policy, Samworth principal Barry Found called hand-raising an “age-old practice.”

“We find that the same hands are going up and as such the teaching does not challenge and support the learning of all,” he said, according to an article in the Daily Mail.

Samworth teachers have been instructed to forbid hand-raising in their classrooms and instead call on students at random to answer questions — which is completely and totally ridiculous.

Now, I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with calling on students at random in itself. When I was in school, most of my teachers used a combination of both hand-raising and random call-outs, depending on the situation. If they — being the professionals that they were — noticed that the same students were raising their hands over and over again, they would usually say something along the lines of “Does anyone else have the answer? You’ve been quiet back there, how about you?” and that seemed to work pretty well. Honestly, I really can’t see any benefits to banning hand-raising completely — but I certainly can see some problems.

First of all, as Jane Crich of the U.K.’s National Union of Teachers told the Daily Mail, an administrator’s making a blanket rule prevents the teachers from being able to decide how to best teach their own groups of students.

“Any professional teacher should be trusted to teach a particular topic in a particular style according to the class they have,” Crich said.

Virginia School System Considers Banning ‘The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn’ and ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ By Stephen Kruiser

A key component in the ongoing effort by American public education to make kids dumber is the removal of entire chunks of relevance from various curricula to craft a narrative more conducive to, and comfortable for, the liberal version of things. It is most often done in the history books, where the more integral stories are excised and replaced with a focus on fringe events or people.

Literature is another convenient target. Book banning is generally considered the kind of thing that totalitarian societies run by tyrannical fascists do, but every fascist has to get his or her start somewhere:

Two classic American novels have been temporarily pulled from book shelves in Accomack County Public Schools.

Superintendent Warren Holland confirmed to 10 On Your Side that a parent filed a complaint about “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”

Earlier this month, a parent voiced concerns to the school board about racial slurs in both of the novels.

“Right now, we are a nation divided as it is,” the mother is heard saying in an audio recording of the meeting on Nov. 15. She tells the board that her biracial son, a high school student, struggled getting through a page that was riddled with a racial slur.

“So what are we teaching our children? We’re validating that these words are acceptable, and they are not acceptable by any means,” the parent said.

Victoria Coombs, a mother of two, told 10 On Your Side she agrees that books with offensive racial slurs should not be read in schools.

“It’s not right to put that in a book, let alone read that to a child,” she said.

But other Accomack County residents told 10 On Your Side that banning a classic for offensive language can be a slippery slope.

“I don’t want to see it happen because if you start with one racial word in a book and have to go on and on and on and pretty soon you’ll be burning books left and right,” R. Kellam said.

How to get ‘higher education’ without getting a college degree By Mike VanOuse

Although I don’t have a college degree, I did attend college for a couple years. An associate’s degree in machine tool technology was requisite for an experimental position at my workplace. Halfway through my schooling, the experiment fizzled, and with that, my academic career. Although I was working at the factory seven days a week and teaching the Bible twice a week at one of the bigger churches in town, I maintained a 4.0 GPA. For contrast, I graduated high school with a 1.75 GPA.

But I was striving for a position, not a piece of paper. When the position evaporated, so did my academic stint.

AT carried an article on Wednesday, November 30, 2016, titled, “The Decline and Fall of Higher Education,” by Michael Thau, Ph.D., a professor of philosophy for 13 years, in which he lamented both what college students are not learning and what they are learning: poor work ethic, low goals, and prioritizing partying over performance.

Anyone can throw rocks at what academia is producing. It bears weight when the hurler is an academic. It’s an excellent read.

I love reading American Thinker. I strongly suspect that I get more education here than I did while in college – or at least the information is more valuable.

I’d like to compare the GDP of academia to the GDP of the blue-collar arena. The orchestrators in academia are the faculty. They set the standards. In the sweaty-stinky world, the standards are set by the parents, foremen (managers), and commanders (military).

My manager at the factory is an excellent example of doing it right. He falls into that rare category of managers who, even though they invest 60-plus hours a week doing their job, spend their off-time coaching their kids’ softball/football/soccer/etc. team. Sports coaches understand congenitally that success requires excellence.

Tony Thomas Teach ‘em Green, Raise ‘em Stupid

According to the latest international comparison, Australian kids are falling further behind, despite ever-larger sums of taxpayer cash being poured into the Chalk-Industrial Complex. One reason we’re raising another generation of dolts: propaganda passed off as wisdom.
Green/Left lobby Cool Australia, backed by Labor’s teacher unions and Bendigo Bank, is achieving massive success in brainwashing school students about the inhumanity of the federal government’s asylum-seeker policies, the evils of capitalism, and our imminent climate peril. The Cool Australia’s teaching templates are now being used by 52,540 teachers in 6,676 primary and high schools (71% of total schools). The courses have impacted just over a million students via 140,000 lessons downloaded for classes this year alone. Students’ uptake of Cool Australia materials has doubled in the past three years.

Teachers are mostly flummoxed about how to prioritise “sustainability” throughout their primary and secondary school lessons, as required by the national curriculum.[1] Cool Australia has marshaled a team of 19 professional curriculum writers who offer teachers and pupils easy templates for lessons that include the sustainability mantra along with green and anti-government propaganda.

Teachers have grasped at the organisation’s labor-saving advantages. As one teacher enthused, “I love the fact they take some of the leg work out of my lessons and allow me to spend more time working on the outdoor gardens etc.” A coordinator (hopefully not of English courses) wrote that the lessons gave her “piece of mind”.

Much of the Cool material, such as lessons advocating recycling and energy-saving, is largely harmless, even beneficial. But material on hot-button political topics is designed to turn students into green activists and anti-conservative bigots.

On asylum seekers, the basic “text” is the film “Chasing Asylum” by activist Eva Orner, whose intention is to shame Australia and mobilise international pressure against the Pacific solution. At least eleven different lessons for Years 9-10 feature her cinematic agitprop, billed as a “documentary”. The film hardly conforms to the professed “apolitical” nature of Cool Australia courses. The film’s descriptor reads:

Chasing Asylum exposes the real impact of Australia’s offshore detention policies and explores how ‘The Lucky Country’ became a country where leaders choose detention over compassion and governments deprive the desperate of their basic human rights. The film features never before seen footage from inside Australia’s offshore detention camps, revealing the personal impact of sending those in search of a safe home to languish in limbo. Chasing Asylum explores the mental, physical and fiscal consequences of Australia’s decision to lock away families in unsanitary conditions hidden from media scrutiny, destroying their lives under the pretext of saving them.