College Board Will Offer a New Test Next Fall

That's right, another test for kids to take, as if we need another one. Starting in the fall of 2009 eighth graders will be taking a test to prepare them for high school and college. The test is not for college emissions - yet - and is just to prepare students for what they have to do in the very near future. The college board vice president said that it's not at all an early SAT tool, it is just a tool to evaluate.



Personally i think there are enough tests and adding another one will just add to stress and may even give rise to more drop outs per year. I remember eighth grade, in Syracuse you go into a new school and it's already stress full. Adding another test will just add to this stress.

Home-Schooling Grows in New York City

Sorry about the late post, I had some computer problems over the weekend.

This post was about the growing trend of home-schooling in New York City.
These parents call it the "unkindergarden" movement, and with registered home schoolers over 2,600 students this year, it really is catching on.
Instead of going the main-stream home schooling route (following a strict curriculum or the teachings of John Holt) these parents do a sort of day-to-day education, that is much less structured, but still every bit as educational and effective. One mother described how they out one day, and she made her son read all the signs that he saw, and count out all the change when they bought something.
Not bad for a 5 year-old.
These parents try to make everyday activities a lesson, instead of doing formal classes. They call it "out-in-the world home-schooling." With parents and children rapidly drifting apart when the child starts school, some parents see home schooling as a way to stay connected with their children.
Not everybody agrees with this out-in-the-world style of home-schooling. When Ms. Rendell told her story on an online journal, she received a great deal of a criticism (a whopping 200 comments.) This was mostly because she described taking the child out to a bar when she got a drink. Rendell describes the reaction as culture shock, because she is British. She also described how they live rent free in a college dorm, surrounded by students.
This brings me to my main question about the article:

-As much as "out-in-the-world" schooling is a good thing, are there some aspects of the world that a child shouldn't be exposed to at such an early age? 5 is a little young to be hanging around in a bar. Even though they couldn't possibly undestand some of the stuff that's going on, it could be a potentially scary place full of potentially scary people. Same with a college dorm. So in short, should children be exposed to these aspects of the world at a young age, or should some things be kept from them until they're older?

Finding a Balance: Books and the Student

The article I read, which discusses a teacher's need to find a balance between technology, books, and what interests their students within the classroom, was interesting for several reasons. As Alyssa discusses in her post, many teacher's are starting to rethink the material or reading lists they choose for their different classes in order to keep students interested, or even just get them interested, in reading. However, I think we need to start drawing out a more postmodern view on literature instead of only viewing things as "modern".

I think there is one most important concept within this article: change. I guess, where would education be if it didn't change to meet the needs of teachers and students? There is value in teaching classics to our students. Arguably, mythology is one of the biggest winners in classical literature that students enjoy. We can't just say, I think we should change our curriculum completely to newer pieces of work. But, we can say, why don't we offer courses that age with our students. Or, I think that the material we provide needs to more accurately match the age groups we teach. Students are learning about issues and problems at younger ages than ever before. So why not face these things with literature that backs up their fears and feelings? Let's give them material they can relate to, and most importantly, find ways to relate the classics to their lives. I remember reading Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet and thinking, this is such a waste of time. I feel that this is one of the least valuable of his plays that we could be teaching our students. There is no reason to get away from Shakespeare, rather, we need to emphasize plays that really challenge and beg attention from our students. More so, I think that teachers need to stay in touch with what their students are interested in. I can't really see how bringing in a pop song about love is necessary to get the point of Romeo and Juliet across, as cute of an idea as that is. Rather, if we must, let students re-create parts of this well-known play. I feel we are truly misjudging the abilities of our students, especially in an age when all they have to do is look up sparknotes, or bookrags, to simply get an over view of a classical masterpiece. It is no wonder that students are not interested or are "bored" with reading, we just keep asking them for the same key concepts and thought processes on each new piece of literature WE give them. So, back to the idea of change, it's definitely time for one, but not one that so directly disregards the reasons we fell in love with English to begin with.

"The Politics of Election Day Classes"

The article that I read pertained to the issue of Election Day and whether or not it should be considered a college holiday. College students across the United States feel that classes should be canceled on Election Day so that they can fulfill their duty as an US citizen successfully, without the burden of classes holding then back from voting. It is obvious that this election is a very critical one to our countries future and it is important to realize that the college population does have a huge impact on this election. It is essential that every student goes out and votes on November 4th. It is also known that a great majority of college students have filed for absentee ballots. However, I don't feel that by making Election Day a national college holiday will help students feel more empowered to vote, its my opinion that more students will take advantage of the day off from classes then using it as resourceful time to vote. Also, it should be known that the election booths are opened for about 13 hours of the day, which should allow college students to find enough time in their day to go vote.

Nevertheless, I also feel that by not making Election Day a college holiday that Professors should not penalize students for missing class, nor should they have a huge assignment, exam or paper due on November 4th. If students are taking the time to vote I don't feel that they should feel rushed to leave the booth to arrive at class.

It is evident that this election day is very important. I think that the college should be doing all that they can, to get all of their students involved in the election.

Balancing Act With Books

This article discussed the decline in reading for pleasure among high school students. Teachers are having a hard time getting students to relate to the literature they are using in the classroom. There is too much of a time gap between the students and the characters in the books. The teacher in the article, Jason Baker, says that he would like to get his students interested in great American authors like Hawthorne and Hemingway, but he says teachers need to rethink their reading lists. The teachers in this article are not saying to get rid of classics like "Macbeth" and "The Great Gatsby," but they are saying teachers are going to have to bring in more contemporary works if they want to get students interested. The themes and characters in modern works are more easily related to by today's students.

Teachers have made many suggestions for how to reverse the decline we are seeing. Some teachers suggested pairing the classics with a modern song. By bringing in the modern art, they are relating the text to something they are familiar with. Another suggestion was to let students choose some of the texts they would be studying during the year. Teachers could fill in the "gaps" with some of the classics. Kids may want to read, but in school, they cannot always read what they want. Teachers say they cannot help students learn to appreciate the books they are reading if they cannot get them interested enough to open the book in the first place.

As educators, I believe it is important for us to "change with the times." As technology is advancing, we quickly bring it in to the classroom and use it to our advantage. Why wouldn't we bring in more contemporary works as they change with the times? Our students are part of the modern world, and that is what interests them for the most part. I think it is important for students to learn some of the classics, but tying them with modern literature is a good idea. They may relate to it on a more personal level and realize that they can gain something from reading.

When Schools Offer Money as a Motivator

I read an article about several schools in our country that have implemented pay-for-performance initiatives. Basically, they are offering cash incentives for higher scores on AP and standardized tests. The article tells of test scores increasing, especially among lower class and low income students, but what is the true cost of these incentives?

We all know that money makes our world go round, and that in order to get ahead, education is a must. Combining these two ideas, at first, seems genius. If I was in high school again and could get some cash just for getting a good score on a test, I might consider trying a little harder in that class. But my focus in my other classes would remain unchanged, or even decrease. Furthermore, when do these incentives stop, or become not enough. When are students going to want more money for their scores, and what will they do when they graduate and go off to college and have to get good scores without monetary incentives? Will they even want to learn?

The bottom line is that these schools are literally bribing their students into learning. Cash incentives may produce higher test score, but they are simply masking underlying problems, such as incompetent teachers and overcrowded classrooms. Students are in school to learn, so they can gain a good education, go to college, and get a good job and make money. It's almost as if these schools are trying to change education into a job in which students are rewarded for what they should be doing anyways - learning.

ARTICLE LINK: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121928822683759447.html

Funky Beats = Learned Children?

"Award winning" poet Nikki Giovanni has introduced a new idea to children's education. She has combined "funky" hip-hop beats with poetry in her new book, "Hip-Hop Speaks To Children". While teaching children about rhythm, this will supposedly boost children's interest in learning. The content ranges from material written by Queen Latifah to the celebrated Langston Hughes.

Initially my first reaction to Nikki Giovanni's new book was filled with doubt. I do not, and I never will, consider Hip-Hop poetry. However, I do not believe I am a majority in this matter and it remains that kids are being exposed to Hip-Hop at early ages. It undeniably influences them. So setting aside my own personal distaste for Hip-Hop, I must concede that if children must be exposed to it at least they are going to learn from it.   

A Push to Curb the Casual Use of Ugly Phrases

I may be bringing up a very controversial topic by discussing this article about the phrases used against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people. The article is informing us about the actions people are willing to take in order to end the negative language and specifically hurtful words used by children at school directed towards gay individuals. I completely agree that it is immoral to hurt the feelings of another person who is different than yourself, however I think it would be utterly impossibly to stop children from saying phrases that they are very comfortable with. For example, the article brings up the phrase “that’s gay”. Many people use this phrase with absolutely no gay connotation. The phrase has been most likely derived from certain homosexual jest; however the meaning isn’t quite the same anymore. Many individuals, myself included use the overplayed phrase “that’s gay” to express a certain lameness or disappointment towards a topic or action. It is not meant to hurt anyone’s feelings or to be specifically directed towards anyone. I do not have a problem with gays, lesbians, bisexuals or transgender people; I actually have a few in my extended family, so to say that I would be anti-gay would be completely incorrect. I am not supporting phrases that hurt people’s feelings by offending them, I am simply stating that phrases’ meaning’s change over the years. It starts to lose the meaning it initially derived from. Many people say things without thinking how they might affect other people. I agree that everyone should take in consideration the way others can be offended by certain phrases in which we do not think are offensive and then cut back the usage of them.

Easing the Toll on Teachers' Checkbooks

This article talked about the money that teachers spend out of their pockets for their classrooms. It estimated that they spend over a thousand on supplies. This estimation seems about right to me; it seemed that every year in high school that our supplies became less and less especially in my art classes. It was usually classes like art classes that were shorted but now it seems that it is spreading. My mother is a teacher and she is always going to the store for more supplies for her students and its always her own money she is spending. NCLB states that every student has the same opportunity to learn but with schools having less money every year this just is impossible without teachers spending their own money and they should not have to. Either the economy figures out a way to get more money to education or schools need to figure out where all their money is going and how to fix it. I also feel that companies should donate supplies. Stores like Office Max and Staples who get good consistent buisness should be able to give supplies to local schools. I understand that sometimes this does happen but usually because of an article like this one. That type of charity should not need to be an obligation because of the media, it should happen more often.

Teaching ESL

The article I chose talks about putting a limit on the time spent teaching ESL students in their native languages in Oregon. Bill Sizemore wants there to be a one year limit for elementary and a two year limit for high school. After these times are up the students must learn in all English. The article talks about the importance of getting all the students to learn English and different ways to encourage this. Within the article many teachers seem to disagree with the time limit.


I agree the importance of everybody learning English in the school system here; however, I disagree with Sizemore's time limit on learning in ones native language. There should not be a time limit on something like this because there are many factors that cannot be controled by our policies. This policy may encourage some student to succeed quickly; however that is only some. Every student learns differently, and teachers should recognize this use strategies to benefit the students while encouraging them to learn. I worked with 4 and 5 year old ESL children many times in a school setting. the teachers spoke almost all English. They used alot of pictures and alot of hands on activities. Although 4 and 5 year olds learn languages alot faster than elders I do think that elders have the capability to learn just as fast, but it never works like that. Although the solution to this can not be pin-pointed at this moment there is one thing that stands true, all students should learn to be fluint in English in the school systems but should have a respectful parrellel to their native language. Hense, it is stated in the national standards for English Language Arts.

Student's Incentive Bank

As of early September, 3000 middle-schoolers across Washington D.C. are being paid for their academic performances. A new program that sets aside 2.7 million dollars has students improving their behavior, attendance, and grades in school. They are working to earn points, given out by teachers. One point is worth $2, and the students can earn up to $100 every two weeks, and a maximum of $1500 a year. The program began early September in D.C. and similar programs have been launched in Chicago and New York.

Is this really the way to close the acheivement gap, as NCLB calls for? I don't believe so. You are giving the students incentives to get better grades, which I believe must work very well, however, for those students who try already and cannot get the grades, this program does nothing for them. In no way does it help to improve their academics. No after-school help is called for, no extra attention is given to them in order to help them receive the money. I think this will most likely motivate some students to do better on their schoolwork and spend more time with it, but I don't believe it is the right approach to take if you're looking to increase student's grades across the board. The program assumes everyone doesn't try their best, and in that assumption, it fails to meet the very real academic needs of some students.

I also feel that the program in itself cannot work very well or fairly. Teachers alone give points to the students, and this in itself is a worry. The teacher could play favorites, or feel sympathy for some students and give them the points regardless of the program requirements. It is too easily subjective. Also, the points are not completely standardized things. Schools can vary their point system according to their own desires for students. If a school wanted to enforce a dress code, they could add that to the point system, and then those students would be receiving points for dressing appropriately, while other school's students receive points based solely on academic performance. It is an unfair judging system.

I agree with creator of the "Capital Gains" program, Roldand G. Fryer Jr., when he says in the article that it is important to show the students short-term and tangible effects of their hard work. This is true, and if the program had an after-school help aspect to it that was designed to help students get to the appropriate academic performance, then I could totally support this. As it is, it is a good incentive, but lacks in its helpfulness to many students. It is an alluring idea, however. I would love to be paid for my academics...but how does that teach students the true meaning of education? Should we really be paying them to learn, or should we encourage them to realize the value of education in itself? Our world is based on the idea that education is the foundation of society, and if students begin viewing it as something they can get paid for, the incentive aspect of it will take over, and true meaning will be lost.

English Period

In the article from the Boston Globe, "English Period," we read about a seven-year-old-girl--Marian Loran. She is being imersed in an English-only class, but she speaks no English. Marian and many other students in Framingham are being forced to remain in English-only classes for the first thirty days of their education in America. The Framingham school district has bilingual programs, but students must first take thirty days of English only classes; then, their parents have to sign a waiver for them to get into a bilingual program. Almost all bilingual parents sign the waivers for their children.

I think forcing students who speak no English to be in English-only education programs (even if only for thirty days) goes against the NCLB Act. Teachers are supposed to make it so all students are learning, and no one is left behind. Sitting in a classroom where nothing is understood is not going to educate students. It is going to make them hate the education system. They are not learning if they do not understand a word coming out of the teacher's mouth. When American students learn a foreign language, they are taught in English and the language. They are at least told what a word means in English so they will be able to understand a little bit of what is going on. So why should students who don't speak English be denied the chance to learn just because they don't know English? Thirty days is a long time to be denied an education but still have to sit in a classroom to wait for your chance to learn.

Do Teachers Have The Right to Blog About Anything?

On "Blogging from the Classroom, Teachers Seek Influence, Risk Trouble" -- By Eddy Remirez

My article talked about teachers who risk their jobs by blogging out their aggression towards their jobs, or more specifically the anger and sadness they experience within their particular school system. Remirez discusses how these blogs have helped teachers connect with, and gain support or advice from other teachers who may be going through, or have gone through, similar experiences. Then, he looks at how these blogs can be offensive to parents or administration, who can sometimes pick out the writers, or find the language and topics to be innapropriate and the idea of anyone-access irresponsible. The article seems to lean towards teachers having the right to responsible, and what I would call "black-boxed" or limited, freedom of speech.

I am not sure I have rested completely on a conclusion for whether teachers should or should not be able to blog freely. I think that teachers should have the right to blog without restriction, just as anyone can make a website on anything. In other words, a person's profession should not limit his or her right to write without censorship. On the other hand, I agree that specifics should be left out of these blogs. Targeting a specific person or place is rarely, if ever, appropriate when negatively discussing troublesome or personal issues that can be accessed by anyone. It would be nice to see a website set up that allows teachers private access and open discussions with each other, where they can create blogs, or have forums that help and support one another through difficult times. Even better, if the government would take some of the teachers opinions and ideas to heart when creating their laws. In professions that can tend to cause burnout, writing that includes some form of venting is one of the best ways to de-stress. Teachers need an outlet to get out their frustrations, and frankly, the teachers lounge is a little overrated for such outbursts. Besides, I think that these blogs could influence changes within a community, if they read and accept the problems that sometimes only teachers can see. Remirez points out how one teacher helped his community gain better funding opportunities through his rants on the disrruptive and destructive nature of the students. However, this teacher also lost his job.

I am left wondering: Should a line be drawn on what teachers can or can not say in blogs? And, who has a right to draw that line? More so, couldn't these blogs offer a potential opportunity for some change if taken seriously by the right people. Where do we go from here? And, the always popular, how do sites like MySpace or Facebook fit into this argument?