Education reform discussion must continue
By Wayne Hoffman
I have a few questions to pose to you:
What if we could have, here in Idaho, an education system where a student who was excelling could move ahead onto the next lesson or the next class?
What if underperforming students could have more time with their teachers so that they could catch up with their peers or even meet up with or pass excelling students?
What if it were commonplace for high school students to take college courses during their sophomore, junior and senior years, instead of being a rarity?
What if a student in Challis could learn chemistry from a chemistry expert in Boise or Salt Lake City or London?
What if our students routinely were exposed to classes at MIT or Harvard or Oxford?
What if all students had access, at their fingertips, to 100,000 volumes of classical literature, even if their school library only had 1,000 books?
We live in an amazing time of technology and possibilities. Yet we continue to have the same old debates about education as if it were the 1950s. Idahoans rejected the school reforms passed by the 2011 Legislature. But that doesn’t mean we should stop talking about education reform. In fact, Idaho should lead the discussion.
Here are some thoughts on education going forward:
First, every child should be able to be educated in a way that best meets his or her needs. For some, that is a traditional public school, like the one my son attends. For others, it is a charter school, like the one my daughter attends. It might also be a private school, or a home school.
It might be an online education, or an education system that uses a blend of digital learning and classroom time.
Second, the state should eliminate any barrier to a successful, thriving public school. Such
barriers might include a pay structure that keeps the best teachers from being highly paid for their hard work and systemic dynamics that divert money and staffing resources unnecessarily out of the classroom. The Legislature should debate each of these, one at a time, one bill at a time: Why is tenure good public policy? Why are master labor agreements that have noexpiration good public policy? Should universities be able to participate in the creation of charter
schools? And so on.
Third, the state requires people to pay into a public education system. But sometimes the public education system is not the best system for a student. Therefore, the state should create a mechanism to make sure that students are able to access the education system that best meets their need, and not hold them captive to a system that doesn’t. Such a mechanism might include an education scholarship funded through tax credits, which are perfectly constitutional andappropriate in a state like Idaho.
And finally, the linkage between K-12 education and higher education should be more seamless than it is today. The Legislature should encourage that fluidity, making it easier for kids to move on to a college degree.
The education debate didn’t end in the 2012 election cycle. It is only beginning, and one that should take priority during the coming legislative session. It is that important, and I bet if we work at it, we can even find common ground and a path forward that will benefit future generations of Idahoans.
Wayne Hoffman is the executive director of the Idaho Freedom Foundation.
You have some good thughts Mr. Hoffman; however, education should be about more than obtaining a college degree.
University of Idaho is offering a class in teaching with technology. All our colleges and universities should be emphasizing teaching computer science to all prospective teachers; i.e., a set of key concepts an understanding of which is essential if schoolchildren are to understand the networked world in which they are growing up. Second, computer science involves a new way of thinking about problem-solving – computational thinking. It sometimes appears that even parents and other grown ups do not completely understand the difference between human and artificial intelligence. Teachers should be able to lead their students to search for answers to complex problems through recursive thinking, using abstraction and decomposition when tackling large tasks, and setting up heuristic reasoning, and iteration. recursion (a method where the solution to a problem depends on solutions to smaller instances of the same problem); and heuristics (experience-based techniques for problem-solving, learning, and discovery).
In the past children were being taught the Logo system in which they were introduced to programming by learning how a mechanized turtle could be instructed to carry out complex maneuvers; however, Microsoft Word has taken precedence over this marvelous program which incidentally was co invented by Seymore Papert, the MIT prof. who helped lay the foundation for Maine’s Learning Technology Initiative which Mr. Luna falsely claimed to be using as his model for Idaho’s prop 3. Papert himself has stated that technology used for information gathering is not an effective way to teach with technology.
There is also an ethical and moral aspect to education reform that is rarely talked about. Albert J. Nock (A Libertarian) wrote about it extensively in one of the best treatises I have read on the subject, even though it was delivered in 1935. We need to begin reform on the premise that we are doing more than training our children, we are educating them to become leaders and to influence the world and society by deeply intellectual as well as affective means.
Within the education debate, we simply cannot neglect teaching the language of computers and an understanding of their capabilities as the most powerful force in shaping their world every day in new ways. So begin reform re technology by training teachers to understand algorithms and recursion by training them to write code so they may in turn convey the concepts to their students. Experiential teaching methods result in life skills not just test taking skills. If we continue to teach and to emphasize the information gathering aspect of technology in our schools we are effectively intellectually crippling our children. They will continue to be the same passive consumers and users of technologies they are today, wasting time on intellectual treadmills created by elites working for huge corporations such as Google and Facebook or studying to pass the numerous tests that are required.
Finding time and money to educate teachers in computer science teaching should be the first priority of the reform agenda.
I like Ms. Winters response as well as the questions posed by Mr. Hoffman. Both go a long ways towards good discussion on the subject.
In my own personal family experience some things worked well for one individual but the same things didn’t work for another even though in the example they were brother and sister.
Their mother was a valedictorian of her high school so they started out with a high IQ as a given. My granddaughter was given the opportunity of taking college courses in High school from which she benefited. However, my grandson who was born on the date that was the division between school years didn’t do as well, he literally was in the class of people who for the most part were 1 year older than him per se. At that age sometimes 1 year makes a big difference in some people, in did in his. In his case perhaps waiting a year later would have worked better. Once started though he was stuck with the arbitrary decision made earlier, you don’t take off a year and then come back in our schools, even if it would be best.
What did work for both of them was the fact that their teachers weren’t burdened with too large of classes and knew both of them personally and worked with us while they were in school.
Granddaughter graduated from college after 3 years as a result. Grandson will graduate from a Technical college next year. (not everyone needs to go to main stream colleges and he’s delighted with what he’s learning).
Then there are those in my family that no amount of change this, fix this, or whatever will ever help them. Their drug addled biological mother screwed them royally for their entire life. For some of them school is basically a baby-sitting service and the others struggle to get through. I get frustrated at times trying to help them as nothing I do helps.
From a guy who started in computers well over 50 years ago, there is a limit on teaching computers today. The field is HUGE and you have to pick and choose what you want to be good in. No one can be the “all encompassing people of yesteryear. So, although computer science should be up there, which part is part of the questions you should ask. I don’t have the answer to that one. Playing video games doesn’t always translate into jobs. Thinking logically does. If I were a teacher and had to teach computers and computers science, just where and what would I start with. It’s a hard decision to come up with.
Somewhere down the line, there is the personal part of education where “people” are more important than machines and sometimes today we get that backwards.
Teach to the test, needs to go away, the sooner the better.
Schools in the United States have been evolving for years. I remember years ago using DOS before windows. Windows was truly a blessing- user friendly. There are other areas that I guess Mr. Hoffman is unaware.
1. Students have been able to take college online courses for about 15 years. Now they can take a class from a college, with other students throughout state, if they can work it into their schedule. These classes are given in by a college professor and students can interact with him/her, and he/she with them. There is no delay in feedback. The only set back is that it is offered at a specific time, and not all student can take it that hour.
2. You have been able to access thousands of books over the internet for years, if the school has paid the fee to allow this access.
3. Public Education is a system that takes all of the students, regardless of background, ethnicity, and finances. This system takes the homeless, the abused, and the drug addicted. It does not have the choice to decide who can or cannot attend. On the other hand, both charter and private schools have that choice.
4. Home schooling only works when the parents are involved with the learning of their children. Many of the children who are home schooled, k-12 online educational program, fail and are eventually placed back into public education years behind.
5. The legislature passed a proposition that required merit pay, of which many of the teachers received said payment. Some schools that were performing on a high level and didn’t show improvement were paid less than some three star schools that showed improvement. In the same schools councilors and computer specialists received no merit pay and they were involved with the school’s high performance just as much as the teachers. There seems to be about a 15% withholding of the merit pay by the State Department of Education for tax purposes. The state had its’ experimental run with merit pay and it was poorly executed.
6. I have said this over and over again. Anything in that master agreement can be negotiated by either party. The evergreen clause only pertains to those areas that neither party deem important to negotiate at that point in time.
One final thought about a previous comment. The students in public, charter, or private schools start heuristic reasoning, recursion, and iteration from the first day they enter school. This is why there are automobiles, planes, and computers.
jayhook,
Good points, sir.
Now the problem.
I was sitting one day watching a young man on the computer in front of me (I was using VNC because he wasn’t trust worthy) and I discovered at the same time he was taking a course at another campus at the same time. I called the other campus and suggested security be called to find out what was going on. Oh, the mischief people can get into.
Price $100 for a simple test, $250 for a hard test. On line courses can be cheated on, big time. In that respect I liked DOS, very hard to cheat because the number of ways to come in were limited and you could control it better. Most people couldn’t put a command together if their life depended on it.
#4 remarks about Home Schooling is right on. I’ve seen both sides of the coin. The bad seems to outweigh the good most of the time. They also miss the social interaction they need too.
Internet can be a good thing or a huge garbage dump. I was forever having to monitor those people with low IQ’s as PORN was their favorite college subject. When someone walked by their workstation and did a double take, I just remotely re-booted the computer. Told HR one day, you have no clue as to what I do for a living and they agreed with me.
Have a friend who will forever be a paraplegic, one of those heuristic, recursion, iteration people slammed into her going 50mph while texting. Anything can be abused in this world. Education can be a blessing or a curse, our choice.
Good to see the Luna Laws, Prop 1, 2, and 3 defeated.
What the public fails to realize is that these laws originated in the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which are Corporations that write and approve bills to submit to their respective legislatures to “Privatize” Public Education for “Profit”.
Google Bill Moyers ALEC and watch the Democracy now program from PBS that explains how ALEC operates. Pay particular attention to the Laptops for kids. Sound familiar. It should, the Luna laws wanted to “Privatize” and the Taxpayer would have been the big loser.
ALEC isn’t even on the screen, dude. You’re blaming a non-entity. Nothing gets done is the bottom line and that doesn’t bode well at all.
Can’t wait for Obamacare to come into play where everyone loses, and then there’s the fiscal cliff in Jan. (with Obama safely on vacation) that guarantees everyone loses. Maybe that’s what he had planned all along, everyone lose.
jay hook,
“Children start to think using heurist reasoning, recursion and iteration the day they walk into school.” Should I take that statement to mean that therefore we do not need to help our children develop those innate thinking skills in relation to the most powerful technological devices they will encounter throughout their lives? In my opinion the enigmatic and exciting nature of the human mind has largely being ignored by schools which have consistently taken the low road in most instances and instead of using computers to develop problem solving, innovation, and creative techniques, we have led students into the comfortable realm of information and communication technology and for the most part left it at that; except for those amazing kids (we call them geeks) who came out of the chute genetically inclined to problem solving in all sorts of ways using their brains and have taken to computers as an extension of that ability.
Perhaps computer science which is basically developing computational thinking, will be be at a variety of levels, but all kids using computers and adults as well would benefit by developing such skills in understanding the capabilities of computers.
Papert’s experiential or constructionism (think Piaget) style of learning using computers leads students to use real world thinking skills and build up to project based learning which often employs team work to deal with uncertainty and changing conditions; it emerges from problem based learning which deals with domain specific methods and the acquisition of domain specific information; and critical and logical reasoning and abstract reasoning. It is learning the difference between a puzzle and a problem. Project based learning leads to domain neutral general reasoning skills that should enable people from all walks of life to identify and solve problems, whether scientific, biological, medical, artistic, etc. Some schools are using robotics and others a variety of puzzle solving techniques as well as student generated projects that involve a variety of real world needs for solutions. I am saying that at this time when teaching with technology is being decided for Idaho public schools, this is an all important consideration.
Obviously this hands on style of teaching requires some rather specialized training and background in “computer science” and the development of computational thinking. I don’t think it is wise to dismiss it as something that already exists as manifested in all the invention that has taken place since the caveman invented the wheel. As I said, to do so is to short change our children and in many ways adversely affect the future of our society.
I think what we need more of in this nation, as a whole, are two parents at home who are involved in their kid’s lives, that teach ethical behavior in their homes, and instill the desire for learning and bettering one’s self in their kids. If we have that, then the sky is the educational limit for a child.
punkrocker,
Second the statement, right on, sir.
Ms. Winters,
Too much computer anything tends to be buried in video games which are not good examples of anything, considering what is popular. Good points, though, ma’am.
DR,
Today, one has to take tests for online classes at a testing center. The students are only allowed to take in to the room those items specified, and identification is required for student verification. Cheating still may occur, but if caught an F for the entire course is the result.
Jenny L. Winter,
I’m not saying that we stop using these methods, but what I’m saying is that they are not rare in the educational system. I also admit that computers are tools that can be used to assist one in using these methods of learning, but I also believe that they are not the only answer for everything. God forbid we ever lose electricity, because the ability to accomplish anything will go down the tubes.
Her’s a thought, The per-frontal cortex, the area of the brain that is specific for the kind of reasoning that you describe, is not completely developed until in age 20 for women, and age 25 for men. Expecting outcomes of critical, logical, and abstract reasoning before the child’s brain is capable will only create frustration. It’s like expecting a ten year old to dunk a basketball.
If “computer science” is taught in school, then it needs to be taught in an age appropriate manner, and more research done to support the implementation.
DR,
Today, one has to take tests for online classes at a testing center. The students are only allowed to take in to the room those items specified, and identification is required for student verification. Cheating still may occur, but if caught an F for the entire course is the result.
Jenny L. Winter,
I’m not saying that we stop using these methods, but what I’m saying is that they are not rare in the educational system. I also admit that computers are tools that can be used to assist one in using these methods of learning, but I also believe that they are not the only answer for everything. God forbid we ever lose electricity, because the ability to accomplish anything will go down the tubes.
Here’s a thought, the per-frontal cortex, the area of the brain that is specific for the kind of reasoning that you describe, is not completely developed until in age 20 for women, and age 25 for men. Expecting outcomes of critical, logical, and abstract reasoning before the child’s brain is capable will only create frustration. It’s like expecting a ten year old to dunk a basketball.
If “computer science” is taught in school, then it needs to be taught in an age appropriate manner, and more research done to support the implementation.
jayhoook,
More on line courses are taken remote to the ‘testing centers’ you talk about. We even found the testing centers we set up didn’t catch the cheats, plain old flat foot detective work did.
What amazed me was the number of people on welfare and grants and such that had $250 to spend to pay someone to take a test for them.
What really messed them up was something I did and I took 1,000 questions and the test was a ‘random’ sampling of say 50 0f them. That stopped more than anything else did. We also ‘re-phrased’ a lot of questions so depending on the phrasing the answer was different. Price for one test went to $1,000 as a result.
Teachers loved some of my solutions.
You said: “If “computer science” is taught in school, then it needs to be taught in an age appropriate manner, and more research done to support the implementation.” True. With one reservation, some never grow up, no matter what the age.
jayhook
Papert had great success and his research and programming methods have inspired many skilled and knowledgable teachers to channel the creativity of children rather than stifling it as is usually the case with those who believe that such creativity is not present when a child begins school. The early use of LOGO was replaced with Microsoft Word unfortunately.
I would say that research has been done and continues to be done and methods implemented in developing higher level thinking skills from childhood to adulthood most recently the development in the UK of Raspberry Pi which is an amazing device according to all I have read about it. It is just being introduced in the U.S. which is all the more reason to slow down the legislature’s apparent drive to stubbornly pursue the Luna laws in spite of their defeat.
A must read for those who think that we are only frustrating our children by trying to get them to think beyond the computer by using computers is Papert’s Mindstorms Children Computers and Powerful Ideas. Children are probably being exposed to computers and cell phones too early; however, they ARE being exposed to them. It is worth it, therefore, to channel their thinking from simple computer manipulations to computer control and the ability to think beyond the computer. Check out the new UK Raspberry Pi which is only in the infant stages of use in the U.S.
DR,
Online courses can be taken away from testing centers; however, there is supposed to be a proctor present at all times. This doesn’t necessarily mean that there is.
I had an uncle just like the person that you explained- he never grew up either.
Jennie L. Winter,
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t use computers or computer skills in school. On the contrary, any program that will increase a child’s ability to learn is important. What I’m saying is that expecting too much from a student before he/she is able to give it, will shut that student’s creativity down. There should be reasonable goals established and frequent successes.
Concerning Papert, I need to read more about him and his experiments before I can communicate in an intelligent manner. I plan on obtaining a copy of the book you mentioned. I hope it is a good read. Thank you for your suggestion.
When we can get together and calm discuss things and talk about what needs to be resolved, then and only then will solutions be put in place. This business of we go tooth and toe nail against each other, solve nothing.
We don’t need to continue that. In the meantime, nothing was solved. Par for the government over this nation. But things are getting worse, also par.