My cross-Sound neighbor picked up on the discussion of charter schools and their failure to live up to their promise.
It is well-known, if not explicitly stated, that many public schools now teach for standardized tests. School test scores are monitored and also used as a part of the No Child Left Behind legislation implemented by each state. Teachers and parents alike are aware of this pressure.
This is perhaps not the most representative pull-quote, but it just struck me as odd somehow: I can remember the week-long ordeals of standardized tests from my school days 30 years ago, so they’re by no means new. Perhaps state tests are, but national ones have been around a good long while. Was that not the case everywhere?
I don’t have a lot of patience with charter school backers. As poorly funded as public schools are now — our PTA pays some teachers’ salaries and covers various expenses that were fully-funded when I went to school — it makes no sense to setup these little experiments at running schools as profit centers. That money should go to the system that is in place, and if anyone feels it’s being wasted, they should go and see how the money is spent. Students of history may recall that many frontier towns and even established communities took pride in establishing school boards, building schools, and recruiting teachers. Those days of active involvement and investment seem to be a distant memory.
If they did spend some time in their local school, they might understand how schools benefit from an infusion of lower-income kids who are eligible for free and reduced breakfast and lunch, rather than by keeping them out (hint: it’s about allocated funding per child). They should take a look at the food that these kids are given and assess how much of it represents solid nutrition and how much of it is the product of agricultural subsidies. In my school they could see how the addition of a part-time tutor/classroom assistant makes for a much-improved student:teacher ratio without building new classrooms or hiring teachers. They would look in vain for a full-time music teacher in most public schools. They may well miss the art teacher who is also unlikely to be there full-time. And they should take note of how many parents they see in the building. If they have a student in the school, they should see how well-attended the PTA meetings are and how many parents are members.
Are public school perfect? Not by a long shot. Are they doing a good job? Not all of them, no. But I think it would make a difference if we could all say that we were working on it instead of undermining the system.
Julie, who got me thinking about this when she linked to me, is a home-schooler. I’m sure there are as many reasons for doing that as there are people doing it. I could never do it: my kids are too good as scholars for me to keep them motivated. My son was reading at 3 1/2 and my daughter right at 4: at 7 and almost 6, they’re reading about 3-5 years ahead of expectations. They’re other skills are also on track or ahead of the curve, and that’s a lot to handle: I’m sure I could find ways to keep them busy and happy, but I don’t know that I have all the right skills and gifts of a professional educator.
Perhaps if our choices were limited, if we lived in an isolated area or one that didn’t offer a great experience, it would be worth considering. But here in Seattle, where you can choose any school in the district, I don’t need to fall back to doing it myself.
I”d assume the schools on Bainbridge Island are pretty good, based on the fact that it’s an affluent community and from what I gather, people live there for quality of life reasons. What makes it a good choice for the Leung girls is that they have both parents around a lot, since Ted works from home: I have a lot to say on single-income households or some way of having a parent around as much as possible.
The bottomline is to make an informed choice. Don’t assume the schools are as good or as bad as you remember your own schools. Meet the principal (your kid may become known to them, as mine have [ouch]), meet the teachers, find out what works and what doesn’t. Only then can you decide if it’s a good place for your child to learn. We spend more time researching cars or appliances . . . . does that make sense?
Hi Paul,
Sorry to take a while to reply to your post. It’s been a busy week.
In regards to what I said about the WASL, my information came from the debate on the island that occurred in 2003 when students protested and didn’t take it. Sure, we took standardized tests when we were kids, but I don’t think that was tied to the level of federal control, funding and pressure that the WASL is now. And we didn’t have to pass a standardized test in order to graduate. Here’s an article in today’s Seattle Times about WASL pressure teachers experience:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002019842_morale30e.html
My husband and I feel we have made an informed choice. We have been discussing the schooling options for our kids since our dating days, starting 15 years ago. The public schools on Bainbridge are said to be some of the best in the state and some day perhaps we may send our daughters there. Our choice to homeschool is based more on our family philosophy, and is not related to the fact that we live on Bainbridge Island (why we live on the island is a long story, involving reasons that no longer exist in our lives, and the schools were not a significant factor.) We would probably be homeschooling right now no matter where we were living. It is great though that Ted works from home and is able to participate in the children’s educational process.
I agree with you on the importance of having at least one parent around at home as much as possible. I think it’s great what you are able to give to your family and your children’s school. Your involvement inspires me.
Talk about inspiring: I don’t have the fortitude to home school . . .
I suspect test results were and are tied to funding or at least certification as long as they’ve been around (what other incentive would a school have to disrupt their lesson plans for a week or more?) As an aside, I was in so-called “gifted” programs when I was in high school and, while in later years it developed into a robust alternative curriculum, when I was first pulled into it, I think it was just a way to get more federal education dollars and claim some status for the school. We sure didn’t see any benefit. Heck, I was never even informed about what to do after high school: I left school without having a proper understanding of how the university system worked: I thought you went there to be a doctor or a lawyer, some specialized career. If you want to know why I stay involved in my kids’ schooling, that should explain it.
And the morale issues are not news to me: I had a few conversations about that in the halls last year with parents and teachers, and the phenomenon of “teaching to the test” is well-known. I was talking to another parent who teaches in a different district and she has a mixed-grade class — only some had to take the test — and it was quite disruptive, since half the class didn’t get either credit for having taken the test or an actual lesson for that week. Easily solved by taking the test takers out and letting someone else proctor them, but how often do you suppose that happens?
We talked about school options and were sure we would send our kids to public school — until we enrolled them in Montessori schools and watched them soar. We were extremely lucky to find a public Montessori school. The private schools are quite competitive for space and they’re private schools: we don’t want our kids in that expectation-based culture. It’s instructive to see how much other parenting styles are reflected in the kids and how they present themselves on the playground and in the classroom. So we got our public school wish and the educational philosophy that works for us. Add in that a Montessori classroom can cost more that $10,000 to outfit and you can sense my relief.