skip to main
|
skip to sidebar
Foundations of Education
Class blog for EDUC 175 and EDUC 261 *** University of California, Irvine *** Prof. Thurston Domina
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
TEST
This is a test post.
Newer Posts
Home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Recent Comments
comments
I would like to say that It is really nice sharing thanks for the whole efforts which you did for us.
-2014-02-12-Skilled Australian Immigration
This program does sound very exciting, but as we know in the field of education, when a new program emerges, it usually is too good to be true. I have 4 major concerns. 1) I don't know that just basing achievement on standardized tests scores is enough. Because we in the u.S, are so test-driven, what instruction ends up turning into is just preparing for the test. 2) As educational patterns suggest, when a brand new program is implemented, scores student test scores do typically increase, but the true measure is whether or not scores will continue to rise with the same program.After the first big jummp in scores during the implementation year, scores often begin to plateau and suddenly the program "isn't working anymore" and districts begin hunting down the next bid program. 3) My third concern is related to my second concern in that when one district is immediately successful in implementing a new program, other districts follow suit much too quickly and throw away large amounts of money on a program that has not been tested over time. 4) This is really more of an annoyance. Critics of the program say it is "kill" and "drill. " If students in other countries are able to learn using a "kill" and "drill" method, why do American schools resist so much. I feel that anything that is not considered fun or can be passed off as "playing," then we don't teach it. Admittedly, these types of drills are not the most thrilling activities, but I think they are necessary. One of the best lessons a student can learn is that not everything in life is fun; I don't think that paying bills is fun, so then can I just choose not to pay them?
-2008-03-24-Anonymous
This article can be seen in light of the Brint and Karabel paper on community colleges. Perhaps the schools are "cooling out" because it is smart business. I think it is ironic that this strategy is referred to as anticipatory subordination: where the junior colleges diversified to include vocational education because they lacked the resources to compete with four-year schools in the traditional academic realm. Ironic, because one that chooses to go the vocational route perhaps does so realizing that he/she too will be subordinate to one with a four-year degree in terms of SES. In both instances there is a compromise of sorts taking place.
The notion that junior colleges are striving to make their mission statements a reality, by providing their students with more options than just transfering, is really more of a reaction to social constraints, than to fulfilling the ideals of democracy and freedom of choice.
-2008-03-16-Anonymous
Being a big believer in early childhood education and taking every opportunity to teach kids things when they are still sponges, I completely see the light in an idea like this. I have often wondered why more programs have not been implemented by schools to teach parents how to educate their kids. I am in a childhood development class right now that has showed me the absurd amount of time children are spending in front of the TV-an activity that uses less brain power than sleeping! I guarantee there are a number of parents who just don't know that slight shifts in their children's after school activities could make such an impact on their motivation and their education. On the other hand, I do realize the reality that many parents don't have much time to spend with their children after school...but even if a language barrier is keeping parents from helping their kids with homework, it would be so beneficial to show them ways that they can improve their childs learning beyond school work.
-Ellen Webb, Ed 175
-2008-03-13-Anonymous
I was going to post another story about the layoffs recently, but it seems Johnny beat me to it. This is a good issue that he brought up though, and not only because I was planning on bringing it up. Both of my parents were teachers and even now i can hear my mom's voice telling me " Sheldon if you become a math or English teach you will always have a job." Sadly this is no longer the case for many in the OC. I understand that running the state is comparable to running a big business, and when money tightens up you may have to pull on a deal or two simply to get by. However in February of 2000 The Govenator is quoted saying, "You know, nothing is more important than education, because nowhere are our stakes higher; our future depends on the quality of education of our children today."
That is a far cry from today where everything seems to be about money. Perhaps the voucher system pushing for a market system like Chubb and Moe suggested did not exceed what was currently in place in Milwaukee, but California is still toward the bottom of achievement in the Country and with the current system that was recently showing improvement taking drastic cuts that trend will reverse. I know for the final we are not supposed to over-emphasize money. However, this is a blog. So to put it in layman's terms "It's all about the Benjamins" There is an age old saying of 'you reap what you sow' right now the California government is sowing inadequately into our public school system and reaping just that inadequacy. We are not going to find a miracle formula to fix this without increased or sustained or simply what you promised us in the first place funding from the state. So with that said I will end with cliche number three golden state legislature... "SHOW ME THE MONEY!"
-Sheldon Sheehy ed175
-2008-03-13-Anonymous
I agree very much with Catherine's suggestion to include other subjects than just reading and math on standardized tests. I feel that history should especially be included in the testing because many current issues in our nation today rely on things we have learned in the past. Also, I think students should be tested on our system of government as well. From my own experience, I feel that I was not taught enough about the United Stated government or U.S and World History. I think having standardized testing in these areas would have pushed me as well as my teachers to put more time and effort into these subjects. The lack of importance of learning these subjects leaves students without a good knowledge base to create opinions on important issues such as the War in Iraq. If we don't educate our students on basic history how will they be able to comprehend these major issues that they will eventually be voting on? The survey that Catherine points out in her post is scary and I feel it is a very accurate portrayal of our current student population. Something needs to be done!!
-2008-03-13-Anonymous
I agree with most that has been said in response to Jimmy's post. I do believe that the silence about white racial identity has prevented us from discussing its history and social construction. This silence wrongly legitimizes the 'universalization of whiteness' as a natural standard. However, in response to Anonymous comment on 3/9, I don't think we should "shift" our focus from race to SES. Rather, I think we should include SES/class in our conversations about race. Although examining the intersection of race, class, and gender is a very difficult task--it is at these junctures that the most interest social phenomena emerge.
-2008-03-11-Anonymous
I agree that financial education or financial literacy as it is sometimes called is desparately needed for two reasons. First, from my experience, it is difficult for low income students to see the connection between school and the real world. Adding a course on financial literacy would be one way to make a connection to students' lives outside of school. Second, for those students that go on to college, learning how to manage your money is critical. For many, college is a time full of major outlays and tiny incomes with credit card companies poised to strike. If students do not possess financial literacy it is easy to make mistakes that will have them paying (literally) for many many years after graduation.
-2008-03-09-Anonymous
Interesting point to bring up Jimmy and Tran. In fact, until recently, I believe that Persians and Turkish individuals were also lumped into the "White/Caucasian" category. I find the politically incorrectness of the white privilege fascinating. Ortiz and Rhodes considered it "problematic" to initiate the discussion of "white privilege" and inequities of education.
Assumptions are constantly made about intellectual ability, about their family support, simply on the basis of skin color. However, being African from Nigeria and African American are not the same, just as being "white"
from Turkey or Denmark (or even South African white) and a White American are not the same although their skin color might be. As particularly the case in places like California where the diversity pool varies greatly; again I ask, should the educational debate continue to focus on race inequality or should it be more of a discussion of socioeconomic history?
Considering the diverse makeup of current multi-cultural society, I wonder if the pendulum will shift.
-2008-03-09-Anonymous
It makes perfect sense that a group of students who come from the same economic and cultural background would have similar educational outcomes. What’s interesting about this article is that it points out the fact that even the educational system itself is homogenized; students are not individually glorified or honored for the personal differences. This may be evidence that when students start out on the same playing field and continue to say on that same playing field throughout their time going through the system, they have more of an equal chance as their peers to succeed. Giving students individual merit makes those individuals become more self-confident (and sometimes even more arrogant or smug) than their peers; conversely, their peers who do not receive such recognition may have a tendency to feel more doubtful about themselves. It is interesting how as a group, Finnish students are higher ranking than students from the U.S., since it seems like there are more highly achieving people from the U.S. However, the U.S. is probably much more stratified within itself, with several people underachieving as well.
-2008-03-09-Anonymous
Loading...
Blog Archive
►
2008
(54)
►
March
(11)
►
February
(18)
►
January
(25)
▼
2007
(1)
▼
November
(1)
TEST
About Me
tdomina
View my complete profile
