2012 senior class photos
2012 West Carrollton graduation
Home of the Week
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > February
February 2006
The plight of private school parents
At a meeting Monday to discuss Ohio’s new voucher program, it was the parents who have already scrimped and saved and pinched every penny to get their kids out of public schools that didn’t meet their standards, and into private schools that do, who were out in force.
That’s because, at least in Dayton, they’re the ones being left out under the new voucher rules.
When lawmakers created the statewide voucher program, they focused on kids who were, in their view, “trapped” in failing schools — kids who are in public schools rated in academic emergency for three straight years. So the rules focus on where the child is attending now — if you’re in one of these qualifying schools, you can receive one of the vouchers for up to $5,000 to attend private school.
But, parents at the meeting last night said, what about those who refused to be trapped? What about those who are under just as much financial pressure as the families in public schools but who stretched and strained to get their kids into private schools because their educations mattered that much to them?
More than one parent last night said they were spending half their monthy take home income on private schools for their kids. And yet, as the rules are now, they are not eligible for vouchers that could make a real difference to their ability to afford the private schools where they said their kids were flourishing. And Dixie Allen, the pro-voucher Democrat from Jefferson Township, indicated changing the rules to include families currently in private schools may be a long shot.
What do you think of rules that prevent current private school families from receiving vouchers?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice
Maybe TV is GOOD for young brains?
This one is sure to spark passionate debate. The New York Times reports that two University of Chicago economists in a new study say there is evidence television may actually slightly enhance student standardized test scores
The study re-evaluated data on television’s effects on children that was collected in the 1940s and 1950s as television came to community that previously had no TV. The results of the study are very interesting, although the implications for today’s kids are not completely clear. The study doesn’t tell us if kids might be harmed by long periods of TV watching or watching lots of age inappropriate programs. And, of course, the nature of TV programming has changed a lot in 50 years. Perhaps todays programs are more harmful?
But TV, by itself, may not be the damaging force that can be blamed for everything from lower test scores to increased violence today.
What do you think of the study?
Permalink | Comments (1) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
Test companies need a watchdog
So here’s a question about testing. If an idea become so totally accepted in the mainstream that opposition to it begins to dry up, does that mean it must be right? And does that mean we don’t need watchdogs anymore to ask tough questions and point out flaws and errors in the prevailing train of thought?
That’s apparently what we’re facing when it comes to standardized tests. Michael Winerip writes today in the New York Times that FairTest, one of the few national voices challenging the use or standardized tests as a sole gateway for judging student readiness for promotion, graduation, college or other purposes, is low on funds an in real danger of closing shop.
As NCLB has taken standardized testing to nearly every grade and every classroom nationally, those who at first wondered out loud if this is a good idea and later complained that it might be dangerous have, by-and-by, mostly yielded to the tidal wave of federal and political power behind the trend. And yet, as Winerip points out, FairTest continues to point out devastating mistakes these big testing corporations make that can actually harm kids and raise tough questions of fairness in the way the tests are created, administered and scored.
Even so, critics say they are so far out of the mainstream, they should be ignored. Blogger Alexander Russo, for instance, chided reporters last year for using a “fringe” group like FairTest as a source at all.
Here at the Dayton Daily News, we’ve written a lot about the impact of testing errors and problems of standardized test creation and scoring.
As the nation plows ahead with more testing-based instruction, I think journalists should ask more questions, not less, about how this largely mysterious process works and whether it is serving us well. And even if you think their point of view is nuts, it’s probably good to have a strong watchdog voice out there asking tough questions, too.
Permalink | Comments (11) | Categories: Testing
Death to cursive writing!
I hate cursive writing. It’s probably because I’m left handed.
Like most lefties, I was incorrectly taught the right-handed way to write in cursive. When you’re left-handed this results in an ink-splattered palm, smudged pages and clunky letters from forcing the pen left to right across the page in the wrong direction (as opposed the smooth glide of the right hand pulling the pen along from behind).
On the radio this morning, the DJ went on a tirade about how he long ago gave up cursive writing and finds other people’s cursive hard to read. I agree. Reading my father’s post cards can be like translating the Rosetta Stone.
A quick Google search produced some evidence that others also don’t see the point of cursive writing. At the No. 2 pencil blog Kimberly argued for cursive while highlighting a Detroit News story that says many schools have stopped teaching it.
I say good riddence. Let the kids spend their time leaning more useful skills.
Repord card after report card, I got “L” for “limited progress” in penmanship until around middle school when I just quit cursive altogether. That sometimes meant a couple points off for some teachers but it was worth it not to break my wrist.
Today, I take notes for a living and I print everything. It works just fine. The only thing I write in cursive is my signature and it is illegible to anyone but me.
But some think cursive is a high art that is being tragically lost. Where do you come down on cursive writing?
Permalink | Comments (9) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
Tag, even running, “unsafe” at school
This is another one of those school stories that’s just flat hard to believe. First, I heard about the story (excerpt below) by Rob McDonald at the Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Wash, that tells of a school that banned kids from playing tag. I shook my head and clipped the story for a possible blog discussion.
Then I started asking people I knew in education if this was a real trend. I was told many schools have banned tag, along with games like dogeball, hopscotch, four square or even, believe it or not, RUNNING!
I asked me first grade daughter and she confirmed that any form of “chasing” each other is strictly banned during recess at her school.
As McDonald notes in his story, schools are desperate to avoid “student-to-student contact.” They worry it will lead to conflict, fights and — the greatest fear for schools — parent complaints or lawsuits. Hurling a dodgeball at another kid, some believe, is an injury waiting to happen. A kid can be tagged too roughly, leading to a fight. Four square and hopscotch can lead to arguments and, potentially, fights.
And running — my God, a kid could fall and hurt themselves!
What do you think of rules that forbid kids from doing what comes naturally — running, chasing each other around, playing games and trying to win?
Here’s an exceprt from Rob’s story (I had trouble getting a link. The Spokesman-Review website is difficult to navigate.)
Tag, you’re it. No, you’re out. But not completely out.
Adams Elementary School in Spokane drew national attention earlier this month for telling parents and children that tag as they know it was no longer acceptable at recess.
“Due to the increase in student injury, fighting, and bullying reports, tag is an activity that will not be played during free play recess time,” Adams Principal Mary Perrizo-Weber wrote in a note to parents.
Tag moved from the free-for-all recess time to a P.E. class that uses Nerf balls to avoid student-to-student contact.
Perrizo-Weber’s decision made it on a local news channel, and the story evolved into one of those quirky tales that ran on TV stations around the country. “A principal bans tag,” is how it was billed.
“My sister called from Minnesota to tell me she saw me on TV,” Perrizo-Weber said. “It wasn’t a big deal in this community at all. … I’ve gotten some pretty nasty e-mails from around the country.”
Members of her family teasingly said they were buying her a shirt that said, “You’re it.”
What got lost in the story, Perrizo-Weber said, was how second- and third-graders were not feeling safe at recess when a pack of other students would run over, smack someone and yell, “You’re it.” She found 6-year-olds with zipper marks on their necks from having their hoods grabbed during tag.
Spokane Public Schools Superintendent Brian Benzel said, “We know that we (as a district) are often the target for torts and claims.”
Benzel said the solution Perrizo-Weber used at Adams was “elegant.”
“Recess in itself is one of the places where we have to be very careful,” he said. “Kids can get injured.”
It’s not like the ’50s.
“The world has gotten more complicated,” Benzel said. “It isn’t the informal world of the ’50s and ’60s. It’s the legalized world of 2006.”
Adams Elementary isn’t alone. Over the years, other Spokane elementaries have put restrictions on tag – though it went largely unnoticed in the outside community.
Madison Elementary has also asked students not to play tag as a free-for-all. Instead, they play what the school calls “circle tag,” which is played around yellow circles painted on the playground. The player who is “it” cannot leave the circle while trying to tag players outside the circle.
“It’s not so much that tag is a problem, but when you play it in a large area in the playground with 100 kids,” it can become one, said Madison Principal Brent Perdue.
It’s not just tag. Perdue’s school created rules for games such as four square, wall ball and hopscotch, because most playground conflicts came from arguments over how the games are played.
Mary Seeman, principal of Spokane’s Franklin Elementary, allows tag and even snowball-throwing, as long as rules are followed.
Tag can only be played with rip-away ribbon belts traditionally used for flag football. Snowballs can only be thrown at easels set up at the edge of the playground. Students used to throw snowballs at a plywood clown, but “we need to have a new one made,” Seeman said. “We cannot find the doggone clown.”
Karen Cowan, Spokane Public Schools coordinator of K-12 health and fitness, laments the changes. She has little authority over principals’ decisions to safeguard their playgrounds.
“Do we want children to do free running on the playground at recess? I would. I want them to run and play and laugh and be excited about movement,” Cowan said. “I think having a lot of restrictions is sending a very mixed message to kids.”
Being active comes with the occasional accident, Cowan said.
“I think it’s unfortunate we can’t allow kids to move. It’s a different day and age.”
Permalink | Comments (13) | Categories: School Violence
Not enough money for schools?
Maybe Jonathan Kozol isn’t the only one who thinks schools need more money.
I got this via e-mail today. An Ohio-based survey says two-thirds of Ohioans believe the state does not adequately fund education. The results also show how Republicans and Democrats view the issues differently.
From the e-mail:
Most Ohioans give their schools good marks, but feel state support of schools is inadequate. That’s the finding of a telephone survey of 717 randomly selected Ohio residents between Feb.12 and Feb. 17. The survey was designed and executed by political communication students at Ohio University using the Scripps Survey Research Center.
Respondents were asked to give a letter grade to schools in the district in which they live. Sixteen percent graded their schools with an A, 39 percent a B, 23 percent a C, 10 percent a D, four percent an F and eight percent don’t know.
Sixty-seven percent said the state of Ohio is not providing enough support for schools, and 52 percent said Ohio’s school funding is unfair or inequitable.
On local property taxes, respondents were almost evenly divided, with 44 percent saying they were about right and 40 percent saying they were too high. Seven percent said they were too low, and 9 percent had no opinion.
Republicans rated schools higher than Democrats and were less critical of finances. Seventeen percent of Republicans gave schools an A, and 46 percent gave schools a B, compared to 15 percent A and 37 percent B by Democrats.
Only 21 percent of Republicans said state support was too low, while 79 percent of the Democrats said it was too low. Fifty-two percent of the Republicans said property taxes were about right, while only 41 percent of the Democrats said so.
Sampling error for this survey is 4 percent. Completion rate was 64 percent.
Any comments on this survey?
Permalink | Comments (1) | Categories: School Funding
What a test can’t tell you
Last weekend I spent some time with some old college friends who were in town. One of them — Pat — was the president of my fraternity. I hadn’t seen him in more than 15 years but I found the story of his life a fascinating example of what you can’t always learn about someone from a test.
Pat was a perfect fraternity president — organized, smart, a people person and he loved to argue. He had a politician’s touch for making you feel like you were the only person in the room that mattered when he was talking to you. He’d put you at ease with genuine curiosity about your story and an easy going conversational style. He wanted to be a lawyer and he had the perfect skills for the courtroom.
Then he took the LSAT — the qualifying exam for law school — and it was a disaster. The last time I saw Pat, he was struggling with what to do next. Apparently his score was so low, no law school would take him. That’s where our paths parted — with Pat an indecisive crossroads.
When I saw him last week, I asked him to pick up the story of what happened next. Discouraged about law, he went into business. He struggled but worked hard and earned an MBA. But he still wanted to try law. Eventually, he found a small law school that accepted him. He earned the degree and was hired by the only lawyer who would take him on before he passed the bar — a small one-man outfit in town.
He passed the bar exam. Then he got his first big case, matched up against the biggest law firm in town. Inspired by the opportunity to test himself against the best, he prepared for the case day and night, went into court and won. Soon after, the lawyer he bested in the case called him and offered a job with the big firm.
More success followed and he’s since been picked up by a national firm and he’s working a few days a week out of the New York office. They’re sending him to a prestigious law school for another law degree in a specialty area.
Which brings me back to that test 15 years ago — the one that said he wasn’t good enough, that convinced law schools he didn’t belong.
Tests are useful tools. They can give you good information. You can learn about yourself from them. But there is so much a standardized test can’t measure. Heart. Desire. Work ethic. Even smarts.
Most of all, a test can’t measure your dreams and the extent to which we are willing to go to chase them.
Permalink | Comments (3) | Categories: Testing
School names for sale?
Yesterday I wrote about the Dayton schools naming a school for former Sinclair Community College President David Ponitz, a influential community figure for two decades.
But today I am wondering, should the school board instead be offering the names to the highest bidder?
In Las Vegas, new elementary schools are traditionally named for community figures and high schools are named for geographic areas. But the school board there is now hopes to raise millions by selling the naming rights to schools.
Among suitors already interested in school district projects are MGM Mirage, Wells Fargo Bank and the Sims Family Foundation. Private donors or companies that pay up can name classrooms, laboratories and school buildings, the story said.
It’s certainly breaking convention to name schools in this way. But if sports teams, theaters and other public structures already are taking corporate names for cash, why shouldn’t cash-strapped school districts get in on the game?
Think of it: Fifth Third High School, NCR Elementary School. Or maybe it would be more like Coca-Cola High and Frito-Lay Elementary?
Permalink | Comments (4) | Categories: Dayton Public Schools
Naming schools can be tricky
From one point of view, David Ponitz is the perfect choice to name Dayton’s new career technology high school after.
As its president for 22 years, Ponitz was the major force building Sinclair Community College from a small outfit into one of the nation’s best community colleges. The new school will be built next to Sinclair and the two will have a deep partnership, with Sinclair faculty and support staff involved in the operation of the new high school.
Ponitz has long been a supporter of public education in Dayton and as chair of the district’s levy committee in 2002 was one of the key forces that helped convince voters to approve millions to help build this new high school and others throughout the city. He will be intimately involved in the crafting of the instructional program at the school.
But looking from a different view, it’s fair to ask if the board has strayed from its own criteria for naming schools.
Back in the summer, the board made its first name change when it followed the advice of students and picked Thurgood Marshall as the name for a new high school at the site of the former Roth Middle School. (By the way, the Marshall family still has not given its blessing for the use of his name, so the school officially has not yet been named).
There was some discussion at that time about how to pick an appropriate name for a new school and the board shared its criteria. Let’s see how those criteria fit for Ponitz. The board said it preferred to name schools after people who are:
• Deceased.
Ponitz, thankfully, seems quite healthy and very much alive. However, the board did say it would consider living people will be considered if a strong case can be made. They did not define what makes a strong case.
• Historically relevant in general, but preferably those with historical relevance in Dayton and in education.
Ponitz has undoubtably been an important person on Dayton’s education scene during his career. Perhaps it’s a stretch to call him a “historical” figure, though. Especially when the board is renaming a school that was previously named for NCR founder John H. Patterson, who no one can dispute is an important Dayton historical figure.
• Good models of citizenship with strong community values.
Ponitz clearly meets this criteria.
• Whenver possible, African American.
Back in the summer, board members pointed out that the school district is more than 70 percent African American but has only one operating school (Dunbar High School) named for an African American. This was part of the reason they liked Thurgood Marshall. Ponitz, while sporting a strong resume, is white and some may question why the board went away so soon from naming schools after African Americans (Marshall and Charity Adams Earley Academy were their prior two choices).
What do you think of the Ponitz pick?
Permalink | Comments (3) | Categories: Dayton Public Schools
Sparking change across the nation
The Dover, Pa., intelligent design trial in federal court was billed as a Super Bowl-like battle over evolution that could reverberate throughout American public education.
This one lived up to the hype.
U.S. District Judge John E. Jones, a conservative Republican nominated in 2002 by President Bush, appears to have single-handedly turned the national tide against inclusion of intelligent design in science curriculum by ruling against it in the Dover case and detailing his rationale in a long, detailed and devastating legal opinion.
After it was issued, intelligent design backers were quick to point out that the ruling was limited to Pennsylvania, which was true. But the impact has begun to mushroom. Emboldened by the Dover case, evolutionists began to push hard elsewhere in the country, including Ohio, where the state board of education has been trying to fit an intelligent design discussion into its science standards for two years.
So yesterday, Ohio essentially withdrew from the intelligent design debate when the state board decided to drop the new science standard after calls from both sides of the political spectrum, including Gov. Bob Taft who appoints much of the board.
So one legal opinion, technically confined to a small jurisdiction, is causing change everywhere.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Categories: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design
Teaching kids to fight science
Wow. Check out this story in the LA Times about a preacher who travels the nation teaching fundamentalist Christian children in-your-face retorts they can use to repeatedly challenge public school science teachers as they try to instruct them in evolution, the Big Bang Theory or even dinosaurs.
So science class will become a out-and-out battle ground. What do you think? Is this topic “fair game” for this kind of acerbic debate?
Update: Speaking of evolution, I noticed on Eric Berger’s excellent science blog that Charles Darwin’s birthday was Sunday and that he was born on the same day as Abraham Lincoln!
Permalink | Comments (7) | Categories: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design
The teachable moment
I was watching the end of the Super Bowl in 1995, a surprisingly good game between the upstart Pittsburgh Steelers — with fresh-faced third year coach Bill Cowher — and the loaded Dallas Cowboys, a team that today is remembered as one of the greatest in NFL history.
Somehow the Steelers were down just 20-17 to this powerhouse lineup filled with future Hall of Famers with under five minutes before an interception sealed the game for Dallas.
For some reason, I just remember seeing this clip of an obviously disappointed Cowher leaving the field with his dejected team as the Cowboys celebrated, when he came upon his wife and three young daughters standing near the tunnel. The youngest, then age four, was crying her eyes out.
And Cowher broke into a sympathetic smile, scooped her up in a hug, looked her eye-to-eye and said, “Aww. It’s O.K. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.”
I was just struck by what a great lesson that was, in that moment, for Cowher to to be able to put it all into a realistic perspective for his children.
So it was nice Sunday, after a decade of football disappointment, to see the Cowher family again on the sidelines doing a celebratory group high-five in the waning moments of the Steelers’ Super Bowl win over Seattle. There is a nice account in a column by Rick Reilly in this week’s Sports Illustrated. (Sorry I don’t have a link. You can only get it online at cnnsi.com if you are an SI subscriber.)
Parents, remember Cowher’s lesson. Involve your kids in your moments of elation and disappointment. Explain what’s happening in a way that keeps it all in perspective. It’s a great way for children to learn about how life works.
Permalink | Comments (4) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
Happy Birthday, Ed Carnival!
Over at the The Education Wonks blog, the one-year anniversary edition of the Carnival of Education is up.
A tip of the hat to the Ed Wonks who began and maintain this important work highlighting the best education blog posts every week for the past year. Having hosted the carnival just once I can tell you this takes a lot of work but it is a great service to those interested in the issues and debates of education.
Permalink | | Categories: The Carnival of Education
Time to stop teaching the low fat lie
All my life, I was brainwashed into believing that the way to stay fit and healthy was to eat less fat. It started in school, where I was taught the federal government’s food pyramid and reinforced by the surgeon general and loads of other government programs and initiatives.
As I gained weight, I fell on and off the wagon but mostly when I tried to diet I did what I had always been told — I cut my fat intake. And instead, I ate more bread, and crackers and pretzels and pasta. I drank more skim milk and orange juice, drinks I had been told from an early age were “good for me” because they were low fat and natural.
Instead of getting healthier, I continued to gain weight and feel worse and worse every day. Then I discovered the Atkins diet. Following it, I lost 50 pounds and saw my blood cholesterol and triglycerides dramatically improve. And I just felt so much better day-to-day.
This taught me first, that different diets work for different people. And then I got angry that I had been repeatedly taught that the only way, or at least the best way, to be healthy was the low fat way.
So today, the big news is the results of a huge study that shows low fat diets do little to protect against diseases like heart disease or stoke and also have minimal effect on weight control.
Now every study has its weaknesses and this one, while very convincing because of its size and scope, is not the last word on low fat diets either. But this and other research I think have raised enough question about the low fat way that perhaps it’s time we stop preaching it to our kids as the only healthy way, through our schools and with force of federal support.
For me, the low fat lie was detrimental to my health for the 15 years it took before I found the diet that was right for me. I hope tomorrow’s kids are taught about all the options and theories of health and diet so they too might find what works for them.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Categories: Schools and Politics
Bush’s education budget
Of the 141 program cuts offered Monday in President Bush proposed budget, 42 were education programs.
And then there’s this. Bush proposes $250 million in new spending on programs to encourage “healthy marriages” and to “strengthen fatherhood” and another $204 million for “abstinence only” sex education classes, which critics deride as a failed program.
And at the same time, Bush proposes eliminating programs that help poor kids go to college, saving $460 million.
So I’d like to hear from you. What do you think of the president’s priorities?
Permalink | Comments (11) | Categories: Schools and Politics
Why Freeman hates Black History Month
None other than Morgan Freeman, the distinguished African American actor, told 60 Minutes he opposes Black History Month because he believes setting black history aside in one month marginalizes the history of a people that is deeply intertwined with all American history.
I found Freeman’s comments in an interesting Houston Chronicle story that looks at the debate over the usefulness of Black History Month.
From the story:
Black History Month has its origins in Negro History Week, started in 1926 by historian Carter Woodson, who wanted to bring attention to the contributions of blacks.
Woodson had hoped the week eventually would be eliminated after black history was fully integrated into American History.
But many say that day appears to be a long way off.
The story describes how some black history experts are inundated with requests to speak at school in February but almost never get any such calls the rest of the year.
I have to admit, some Black History Month programming makes me squirm. It’s unnerving, for instance, to see Martin Luther King Jr reduced to a cuddly, non-threatening cartoonish character who simply “helped black people,” rather than the fiery, establishment-bashing radical that led a nation-changing revolution. The story describes some school Black History Month celebrations that are little more than soul food lunches and MLK posters.
Yet, Black History Month does pressure those schools that might otherwise ignore black history to at least address it. And black history programming done right can certainly benefit kids.
What do you think of Black History Month?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Categories: Schools and Politics
Oprah bans homeschoolers
I stumbled across this weird story that accuses Oprah Winfrey of discriminating against homeschoolers.
It seems Oprah is sponsoring an essay contest for high schoolers from “across the nation” but the rules limit entry to only those who are “enrolled full-time (and in good standing) in a public or state-accredited private or parochial school, grades 9-12,”
Homeschool groups are angry and asking if this rule was specifically designed to block their entry.
I just find the rule to be awfully strange. Why limit it in this way? Why not make the contest open to all kids by age instead of grade, so maybe for ages 14 to 18 or so? Essay writing talent could be found anywhere — in an accredited school, an unaccredited school, a home school or even within a kid who is not “in good standing.” (Suspended or expelled, I suppose this means. But couldn’t that be an even better winner’s story?)
So I don’t follow the logic. What do you think of Oprah’s rules?
Permalink | Comments (19) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
The reform of the moment
So President Bush proposed more math and science instruction in public schools during his state of the state address this week.
So here’s my question — whatever happened to reading?
Remember when Bush came into office and all the education talk was about reading and how important it was, so important that he wanted to convert Head Start into a reading program?
Well, that was yesterday. And in politics, you can’t let your education reforms go stale. There’s always something better you can propose.
This happens everywhere. Consider Ohio’s testing program. Originally, the state tested kids in multiple grades in reading, writing, math, science and citizenship. But then, Gov. Bob Taft’s commission on student success proposed shifting to “end-of-course’ exams — a menu of tests high school students could take when the completed required courses until they passed a certain number that was required.
But then came No Child Left Behind, which cared mostly about reading and math, and the feds weren’t really into end-of-course exams. So Ohio junked the whole idea and built an NCLB-friendly testing system based mostly on reading and math.
About a year ago, the administration was all about high school reform. Now it’s math and science.
What will it be tomorrow?
Education Carnival No. 52
The latest Carnival of Education is up, hosted this week by Diane Weir, a school board member in Massachusetts. Diane is one of the very few school board members with a blog anywhere in the country. I think more should try it. She originally began the blog as a promotional tool during her election campaign, but now uses it to communicate with constituents, and that includes posting her voting record.
You can read more in an online interview with Diane by Matt Johnson on his blog Going to the Mat.
Permalink | | Categories: The Carnival of Education
