Underfunded Schools Forced To Cut Past Tense From Language Programs

[LWolf]

<snips>

WASHINGTON—Faced with ongoing budget crises, underfunded schools nationwide are increasingly left with no option but to cut the past tense—a grammatical construction traditionally used to relate all actions, and states that have transpired at an earlier point in time—from their standard English and language arts programs.

.............................................................................................

"This is the end of an era," said Alicia Reynolds, a school district director in Tuscaloosa, AL. "For some, reading and writing about things not immediately taking place was almost as much a part of school as history class and social studies."

"That is, until we were forced to drop history class and social studies a couple of months ago," Reynolds added.

..............................................................................................

Regardless of the recent upheaval, students throughout the country are learning to accept, and even embrace, the change to their curriculum.

"At first I think the decision to drop the past tense from class is ridiculous, and I feel very upset by it," said David Keller, a seventh-grade student at Hampstead School in Fort Meyers, FL. "But now, it's almost like it never happens."


http://www.theonion.com/content/news/underfunded_schools_forced_to_cut

[Jim__]

1. If the Chinese can get along without a past tense, then so can we.

Anything they can do, we can do better. x(

[Ilsa]

2. Right on! Our kids need more instruction on living in the present!

You know, if they just stop building schools, it would be alot cheaper to educate the kids. :sarcasm:

[Lasher]

3. This is an outrage!

[goddess40]

4. NCLB purpose is to kill off public schools

and some states with revenue caps are speeding it along to it's goal. We have spending caps in Wisconsin and every year we are expected to spend less - eventually the doors will have to close.

Spending caps wouldn't be the end of the world if the government did something about the runaway costs of health care, insurance and fuel prices but those three things combined with all the unfunded mandates of NCLB are destroying our great schools. Since all states are suffering under NCLB the loss of education programs doesn't effect their rank so many aren't even aware of the demise.

[LWolf]

7. As someone who spends her life

in public school classrooms, I sure would like people to become aware of what is going on. The first step is to listen when we speak about it.

Who listens?

[Thothmes]

20. I suppose

That raising taxes to support the school system in the state is out of the question. We have grown so use to sucking on the Federal educational nipple, that we seem to have forgotten that schools are a state responsibilit, not the responsibility of the federal government. JMO

[Benhurst]

5. There is no longer a need for a past tense or history classes.

The past is whatever the Bush Crime Family says it is.

[LWolf]

6. Exactly.

:D

[La Lioness Priyanka]

8. i love the onion

[raccoon]

9. Wish I could've attended that. If I didn't know the past tense, maybe

the past wouldn't exist.

[DarkTirade]

10. Wait.. I thought the Onion was satire... why are they reporting realistic things?

I mean, I could totally see this happening in schools... :P

[LWolf]

11. Actually, this satire mirrors what we are dealing with so well,

that I was surprised to see the thread moved to the lounge. The number of things we are urged to cut out of the curriculum, in order to focus on teaching to the test is constantly growing. This summer I was told by admins that the only focus in our district will be reading and math, "and if that means cutting out history to make more time for that focus, so be it."

[DarkTirade]

12. If nothing changes by the time I'm ready to have kids, I think I'm gonna have to leave the country.

I'm not gonna let my kids get that bad an education... and I sure as hell can't afford homeschooling or private school.

[LWolf]

13. I'm a teacher.

Your avatar is a good representation of how my profession is faring under the current regime.

[DarkTirade]

14. You get shot out of a cannon, and left with your head stuck in the sand, your bum on fire...

yeah, sounds about right.

[KitchenWitch]

15. I love the Onion.

[Shakespeare]

16. This got moved from the lounge to GD? An Onion piece?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Dr. Strange]

17. Keep commenting!

I think we might get it moved to LBN!

[Oeditpus Rex]

18. Hell, keep it kicked and we'll get it on MSNBC

[LWolf]

19. Actually,

it got moved from GD to the lounge.

I requested that it be moved back, because I'd like to see people discuss the situation that the Onion is satirizing.

I appreciate the mod who moved it back.

Do you agree with cutting things like history, music, science, spelling, and grammar out of the curriculum in order to focus all of our time and resources on passing reading and math tests?

[flashl]

21. More input for discussion ...

A New New Federalism

The federal government has pushed far too deeply into the routines and operations of the nation’s public schools, now regulating everything from teacher credentials to the selection of reading programs.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) made the problem worse. Ironically, the one way to extricate Washington from the minutiae of K–12 education is to give it more power in one realm—specifically, the power to set national standards and tests—and then ask it to back off from just about everything else.

The federal role in education has always been a disappointment and a frustration. For most of our history, Uncle Sam steered clear of the issue; in the days of Jim Crow, this amounted to shameful neglect. After Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965), the pendulum began to swing toward the other extreme: Washington became an overbearing, micromanaging schoolmarm, attempting to coerce equity, then excellence, from the K–12 system through regulation and bribery. This, too, has failed to produce schools of which our nation can be proud.

NCLB was supposed to improve the situation, to signal a new New Deal between the federal government and the states. Think management. In concept, the states would embrace tough accountability for their schools and districts and the schools would yield markedly higher achievement; the feds would back away from regulation and slash the red tape. The combination would give schools what they needed to be successful: strong incentives to boost student achievement, combined with the freedom of action to innovate and get the job done. When announcing his program in 2001, George W. Bush described the principle this way: “If local schools do not have the freedom to change, they cannot be held accountable for failing to change.” Parents, too, would be empowered through additional information and school choice, said the president. Freedom and transparency would rule, and the payoff would be millions more “proficient” kids.

Unfortunately, politics, compromise, and bureaucracy reared their familiar visages. Neither states nor the feds have kept their part of the grand bargain, leaving our schools undermotivated and overregulated, our parents frustrated and bewildered, millions of our kids subproficient, and thousands of our schools stuck with “in need of improvement” labels but not improving.

Read More ...

[LWolf]

23. This is an interesting article.

It has much of substance to discuss, although I don't agree with all of the assertions, or the proposal.

I don't believe that NCLB was supposed to improve public education in any way. Yes, I know what is claimed: that NCLB is supposed to "close the achievement gap." I also know that it was never intended to be "flexible," and that it was set up to guarantee that every school would eventually fail. That's a simple exercise in statistics.

NCLB is another tool in the decades long drive to destabilize public education and open the door to privatization.

I don't agree with the proposal, to set national standards and tests and "then get out of the way."

I might, in very limited circumstances, be ok with a set of national standards. If those standards were very few and very broad. Perhaps something like this:

1. Every Student will be literate.
2. Every student will be numerate.
3. Every student will be an independent, complex thinker.


I would not support any attempt at a national test. I don't like the standardized tests we're using now. I know how limited they are, and how the data they collect is mis-interpreted, spun, and misused for political purposes.

I would put the responsibility for deciding what constitutes literacy and numeracy at the state level, and make sure that only a very few benchmarks are created.

Then I'd put the responsibility of collecting data to provide evidence of meeting these standards at the district level.

There would be no high-stakes; an explicit recognition that schools provide opportunity, but that families and students must be responsible for using that opportunity, actively engaging and participating in their own education.

[flashl]

24. I understand your concern about national standards

there are problems at the state level.

States are either lowering their standards to create the appearance they are meeting NCLB requirements or elevating standards in public schools to accelerate failure to enforce school consolidation plans.

Florida's FCAT is a great study in state standards.

[LWolf]

25. I've worked in 2 different states

since NCLB. Here are my thoughts about standards:

I have no problem with setting high expectations, with high standards. I have a problem with the testing and awarding scores based on those tests. Here is what I mean:

As a teacher, if I keep my expectations high, and keep working toward them, I may not, will probably not, get every student to achieve at that level by the end of the school year. They will, however, get much further than if I set the goal lower. If I set the goal low, I may get more students there, but fewer students beyond that low level.

High standards, high expectations, will lead to higher performance.

Whether or not those standards are ever actually reached.

Low standards lead to lower performance.

Take the high-stakes out of the process, take the intent to label those who don't reach the standard "failures," and then the high standards achieve something constructive. More students reach them, and more students get further in their efforts, even if they don't get all the way there.

As a teacher, I consider progress towards a standard to be "success," even if the student didn't get all the way to the top.

As an educator, I am willing to be responsible for my part of the equation: I'm willing to be responsible for doing my best, within the structure I'm placed in, to give every student abundant opportunity to learn and support in that process. I'm not willing to be held accountable for others' responsibilities.

It is the family responsibility to value learning, and to pass that value on to their children. It is the student responsibility to actively engage in the learning process and make the most of the opportunities. It is the district/state/fed/VOTERS' responsibility to provide me with the space, resources, and support to facilitate my efforts.

All of those responsibilities factor into the outcome.

My former state, California, has very high standards that are poorly written and poorly conceived. The political machinations that went on to produce those standards back in the 90s were a lesson in political dysfunction. Still, the standards are okay as a goal to work toward, if high-stakes are not involved.

My current state, Oregon, has some well-written and very appropriate standards. In this case, it was not the standards that were lowered, but the passing score on the test. As a matter of fact, that was discovered, addressed and adjusted last year. I'd rather, frankly, reroute the money we spend on NCLB accountability. I'd rather spend our money on increasing the length of the school year and decreasing class size. More time and opportunity for learning, rather than more tests.

[flashl]

27. Your points on high standards and expectations are great.

Truly sometimes standards create a one-size fit all mentality. Several years ago, I believe in Baltimore, an afternoon program got a lot of attention. IIRC, police officers were literally baby-sitting troubled and underachieving kids. One officer decided to copy a single page from a book, distributed the page to the students and told them if they learned how to read it, they could stand in front of the class and talk about it. Long story short, he created the best debate club in the school district. Parents came to the debates in the evenings to support their children. Other officers duplicated the ‘one-page’ model and were also able to change the focus of their "troubled" students.

Those students who were labeled as ‘throwaways’ under the standards protocol became academically successful. The unorthodox 'one-page' model was the spark for those students. Rigid standards would have never allowed this approach to exist.

[uppityperson]

22. Good decision.

kick for The Onion.

[Dorian Gray]

26. While reading,

I was like: Must be the onion!

Of course it was. Silly me, I didn't look at the link til I finished!

[LWolf]

28. Sometimes life is too close to the Onion, isn't it?

:rofl: