7.17.2012

No CREATIVITY For You!

I couldn't help it when I read Yong Zhao's post entitled, "Doublethink:  The Creativity-Testing Conflict".  All I could think of was Seinfeld's Soup Nazi screaming, "No creativity for you!"

I am going to post a portion of the blog below (apologies to Edweek for posting it in its entirety previously, apparently breaking a number of copyright laws!) but here are the words I simply HAD to pen in response the Zhao's question, "I don't know how policymakers can hold, simultaneously, these two ideas, creative entrepreneurship and test-driven curriculum standardization, that both research and common sense recognize as contradictory..."?
It's called Cognitive Dissonance...welcome to the Republican Party.

As an education researcher from OKLAHOMA I truly appreciate your post!
The minute our governor stepped out to make a glowing comment on the sham of "testing to creativity", I knew I was going to have to find some specific research to point her bloodhound nose - so keen on sniffing out further little nuggets for her 'education reform' agenda - in another direction.

You have exceeded my expectations here. If she and her 'reformer' pack can't digest the specificity and truth here...well...she's only got 'til 2014!

Doublethink: The Creativity-Testing Conflict

Premium article access courtesy of Edweek.org.
...California, Massachusetts, and Oklahoma have begun exploring the development of measures to gauge the extent to which schools foster creative and entrepreneurial qualities in their students, according to a Feb. 1, 2012, article in Education Week. "What brings great test scores may hamper entrepreneurial qualities.".........
Standardized testing rewards the ability to find the "correct answer" and thus discourages creativity, which is about asking questions and challenging the status quo. A narrow and uniform curriculum deprives children of opportunities to explore and experiment with their interest and passion, which is the foundation of entrepreneurship. Constantly testing children and telling them they are not good enough depletes their confidence, which is the fuel of innovation. So, by any account, what policymakers have put in place in American schools is precisely what is needed to cancel out their desire for creative and entrepreneurial talents......


I don't know how policymakers can hold, simultaneously, these two ideas, creative entrepreneurship and test-driven curriculum standardization, that both research and common sense recognize as contradictory unless they change the slogans of 1984's Oceania, "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength" into "Standardization is Innovation, Uniformity is Creativity, and Testing is Enterprising" for education today.

 So, just to follow up here, I thought it might be fun to pull some of the articles I've been saving in my "Creativity Nonsense" folder.  The ones below are all those generated just in Bible-belt, Red-state, Conservative OKLAHOMA!  How's that for cognitive dissonance?

First of all, did you know that Oklahoma has not only has a CREATIVITY website, but an annual Creativity Forum?  Here is the picture of the website... VERY CREATIVE!!!  Black and white is very artsy!  Please note, lucky us, we can make a donation (for what?), become a member or even "like" them on Facebook!




This, is more troubling...Did you know that we have a South Korean researcher who will develop an Oklahoma Innovation Index?


7.09.2012

SNAP Goes the Teacher...


Today, I saw Rick Hess' blog, "A Good Teacher Is Hard To Find".  While I didn't find this guest post by

The trick isn't obsession over what qualifies a teacher to join the profession. Our policies should instead be loose on entrance and tight on results--encouraging maximum flexibility for states, districts, and charter schools to recruit teachers as they see fit while seeking to find better ways to identify good and bad teachers, reward the good ones and keep them in the classroom, and move out the bad ones.
What this means will vary by district-to-district, school-to-school, but a few quick thoughts:
-we should continue to invest in designing smart and robust teacher evaluation tools, which include value-added measurements of student performance--where appropriate and as a piece of the puzzle.
-teacher compensation should not be linked solely to degrees earned or years of experience but to quality of work, including student achievement.
-we should allow more teachers to enter via alternative certification programs, and give charter schools increased flexibility to hire the kinds of teachers befitting their unique missions.
-schools and districts should consider a classroom career ladder that permits good teachers to remain in the classroom while affording them opportunities to grow professionally.

In the same way there's not a single "what works" for identifying good teachers before they enter the profession, there's similarly not a one-size-fits-all on the evaluation end. But the broad principal--loose on entrance, tight on results--will permit us to rethink how we go about recruiting, training, and evaluating teachers in the 21st century.
Ooohhhh.  This sounds awe-inspiring frankly, but my experience just doesn't add up to this assessment from a man who has probably NEVER been in front of a classroom in his life (Daniel is, program manager in education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute). 


This was my take on the issue at hand:

As a former science teacher (now homeschool mom) - my perspective is quite different. I have a M.S. in biology. I was alternatively certified. I taught at a charter school.

Though I followed the state standards for each of the grades I taught and used the books appropriate for the age level - I was deemed "too hard". I "asked too much of my students". I was finally put on a plan of improvement after being called on the carpet in front of parents in my principal's office numerous times.

In my experience, principals don't want good teachers because parents complain. Good teachers don't want to teach the way they know they should because they'll likely be constantly having to explain themselves to avoid firing.

All this nonsense about linking student test scores to teacher pay and all the other "accountability" reforms (ala Jeb Bush) that states keep signing on to, are not going to amount to a hill of beans other than to keep the really good teachers from signing up to teach. How can one teach when you're suddenly responsible for whether a child had breakfast or a fight with his mother the morning of the test?

It cost me a chunk of money to get my alternative certification just to have to constantly justify my reasoning behind trying to make my students do something more than the 'busy work' the parents apparently desired and the principal wanted. Why in the WORLD would good people desire to have that kind of job other than the sheer idealism that many of us have entering the teaching profession (that is soon beaten out of us to the point that we leave)?

Until the now-majority of PARENTS decide they want more for their children than a SNAP card, we're all sunk. No amount of coercion by a state or federal government will fix that. As soon as parents/students have to reap the whirlwind that would be ZERO public assistance for the results of allowing/perpetuating mediocrity, stupidity and sloth, things will change. Until then? Buckle up for a very bumpy ride!
Here's a very interesting article I also found in EdWeek today.  Check this one out as well.  "The Pros and Cons of Accountability".

6.14.2012

I Will Not Be Assimilated!

Today, Robert Pondiscio of Core Knowledge Foundation, wrote a post that made me have to stop and respond.  It was called, Nobody Loves Standards (and that's O.K.).

You know what?  That's BUNK! 

I love the fact that there is a standard for how restaurants serve food, as I don't enjoy the prospect of Tomain poisoning or Salmonella infection.  I love the fact that I am entitled to a certain standard of treatment by my physician and dentist as I don't enjoy the prospect of being made more ill or losing a tooth I didn't need to.  These kind of standards are those imposed by a municipality or city via my tax dollars and are designed to protect the community they serve.  If I decide to open a restaurant and decide these codes or standards are too harsh, I can petition my city government to have them changed.

The Common Core State Standards are in NO WAY an apples to apples comparison with those described above.  The CCSS are imposed on students and parents by education elitists who think they know better than parents and students, what students should learn.  They were created in a galaxy far, far away (the National Governor's Association - a private, dues-collecting organization), by a group of individuals so that no one single group can be held accountable for their creation.  How then, does a parent or student complain or have them changed if they feel they are not living up to their advertised excellence?  Good question.

In short, the Common Core State Standards are an extra-Constitutional form of control which usurps the rights of those that are supposed to use them and pay for them.  That is not what a STANDARD should do in this country.

Consequently, I felt the need to respond - rather cheekily I agree - to Mr. Pondiscio assertion that Common Core State Standards will be just what the doctor ordered when it comes to teaching reading - and apparently ALL of elementary school for that matter.

Below was my comment:
I am speechless.  I am a former Core Knowledge 7th grade Science teacher.  For you, of all people to be touting - in any way - the Common Core, makes me, well, ah, okay, speechless.

Though I was frequently frustrated by the cross curricular aspect of Core Knowledge (getting the History, English, Math and Science teachers all on the same topic for even a day, is more than difficult to wrangle), I found it rich and interesting and easy to align with our states standards.  I often spent time ferreting out information on specific scientists as we covered specific topics in chemistry and life science, and giving the students a real glimpse into the minds of the people that came before them to prepare the way for them to learn.  I tested (I didn't ASSESS) my students after each unit to make sure they were 'getting' the harder concepts (such as the Periodic Table) and my students did well above average on their state Core Curriculum tests.

I'm so glad I'm now at home schooling my own kids.  With CCSS, teaching to the test would be my reality.  Gone would be the days of foraging around in the lives of scientists or trampling around off-topic to watch a film to reinforce a concept or spending enough time covering the Periodic Table well enough to make sure everyone got it.  Heck with that, I'd have to cover everything that would be on the test, or lose my job when my students weren't ASSESSED at a proper assessment 'interval'. 

Teaching was once a profession in which the promise of (and necessity for) individualism and autonomy, drew those who enjoyed imparting wisdom to people younger than themselves in whatever way they found worked best.  Now, all that remains for teachers is to become assimilated into the collective called 'accountability' while figuring out a way to remain at least human enough to 'facilitate' classrooms of children glued to computers and iPads full of programs effortlessly guiding them toward their necessary place in the global workforce.

Though I fear my commentary here will simply be overlooked as the lunatic ravings of a dissenter for not including enough of the CCSS buzzwords I've picked up over the year and a half I've been studying and writing about this initiative (I devoted an entire blog to those!), I'm pretty sure teachers still in the classroom would agree with my thoughts.

Why otherwise intelligent people such as yourself seem so intent upon joining the Borg, I can't possibly comprehend on any level.  The collective is NOT (nor has it ever been) the way, and I for one will not be assimilated. 

6.05.2012

Do We Really Know What It Means to "Privatize" Education and Other Government Services?

The following is a commentary I wrote for my Facebook page this morning.  Last weekend I took part in an absolutely excellent workshop for a number of researchers, researching a number of different areas. It was very eye-opening to see how ANTI-REPUBLICAN governance is occurring across all spectra of government and how few people (including me!) really understand how pervasive this phenomenon is.
I will be writing some more well-researched (with links) blog posts on such topics as Technocracy, but today's post is more of a down-and-dirty, opinion piece.  I urge you, however, to "google" or "bing" or whatever you do - some of the topics and ideas I present here and see what you find.  We MUST begin to see our government as it is rapidly becoming - essentially Marxist, with rising Fascism components - or we will most certainly be lost.
--------------------------
Many national Republicans - (including Oklahoma Senator Clark Jolley) - want to privatize government services such as education and DHS.

Is privatizing public services BAD?  If so, how?
Yes, privatization of public government is BAD.  A Republic is governance of the people through members of the people elected to represent the populace using the force of law to protect them from their government.

When you PRIVATIZE government, you remove (shut out/eliminate) the voice of the people in the process. When government services are privatized, citizens PAY for services which exist in a private sector sphere, thereby eliminating 'free market' principles from working. A 'privatized' government agency can't fail because tax payers prop up it up to prevent that from happening. This produces ZERO oversight or accountability to the taxpayers who pay for the 'services'. This, a process directly akin to Fascism in many ways.

Senator Jolley wants to privatize DHS. Okay, let's say a DHS head is paid via public money, but is 'elected' to that position by a PRIVATE BOARD through what is called an appointment. Now, tax-payers little to no ability to call for his/her dismissal because he/she is under PRIVATE contract with an essentially private board.

Additionally, education in America according to the Founders, was to be PUBLIC so that ALL people - whether rich or poor - could take advantage of the ability to learn to read and to write in order to understand the Bible and the Constitution. Latin American (and many African) countries have PRIVATE education, which results in a situation in which much of the poor populace is never even able to be taught how to read and write.

This shift in 'consent of the governed' to 'governance' is completely antithetical to the Constitution. Those suggesting we should privatize government services in order for it to become more efficient are simply attempting to take complete control of government moving it from "consent of the governed" to "consent of the APPOINTED". Americans should NEVER consent to PRIVATIZED government, yet we have been lied to and told that this is better for all. I say NO to Fascism! How about you!?
--------------------------------------
 Here are a couple of examples I found in my inbox just today:

Politicians and Team Owners Snooker Sports Fans and Taxpayers

vouchers boo hiss

Bill Gates: Selling Bad Advice to the Public Schools

Obamacare Has Literally Replaced the Constitution Not about education, but about exactly the idea we explain here.

5.31.2012

Parents Need To Take A Greater Role in the Education of Your Children, But You Can't Because _______ (fill in the blank)

I've been meaning to write a post for a number of months now on a favorite soapbox topic of mine - Education Reform and the Role of the Parent.

When I first set out to try and 'right' perceived wrongs perpetrated on decent taxpaying citizens and parents through the public school system, I thought I was going to make quick headway.  I thought, if I talked long and hard enough (I guess), I could make people see how easily and simply all today's educational issues could be solved by moving education back to the local level.  Who, after all, more than a parent would want to see their student thrive in their education? 

I have been wrong about myriad things in my life, but about fewer things have I been more wrong.

I remember one of the first times I discussed a bill with a legislator and said something akin to, "Parents don't want that.", and I was told, "Parents don't know what they want."

I've also been told, "Too many parents out there today are doing a terrible job - someone has to take care of those kids."  "We all talk about local control - but local school boards are doing a terrible job." 

There was even a legislator this session who wanted to make ALL home schoolers provide their lesson plans and curricula to the state because she knew A family who was 'home schooling' their children because they couldn't manage to get the kids to school on time due to the fact that their crack habit created somewhat irregular hours. 

There is an old Chinese proverb that says, "If you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day.  If you TEACH a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime." 

Sadly, we have no idea how in the world to decipher this proverb anymore because humans have finally come to the point in history where legislation is written at EVERY level about EVERYTHING to protect EVERYONE from THEMSELVES.

No, there are no responsible home schoolers out there home schooling because there is ONE that isn't.  No, there are no school boards out there doing the right thing because there are a number that AREN'T.

We don't write legislation, regulations and mandates TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE doing the right thing in society anymore, we create laws to try and force those that aren't into doing so.  This ideology exists in direct opposition to that of the Constitution and the Founders' vision of our Republic.  According to the Founders, government wasn't instituted among men to protect men from THEMSELVES, but to protect THEM from the government (over-regulation).

Yes, I feel that MANY parents today (maybe even a majority) have abandoned their children on a number of levels (emotionally, physically, economically, behaviorally).

I know good Christian parents who just can't bear to be honest with their children and reproach them for bad behavior because "We must speak life" into our children and "shaming or confronting" them will only make them feel worse about themselves.  They 'helicopter' around their children's activities and schools because they never want to be out of the picture, but their eyes remain blissfully closed to anything other than perfection.

I know parents who need to have a house in Oak Tree but can only afford it on two incomes so they drop their kids off at school in the morning, allow them to let themselves into the house after school and remain unsupervised until they come home from work, pick them up and then cart them to 20 or 30 after school activities because they feel guilty about not spending time with them.

I know parents who have been left by a spouse (or whose other half is serving overseas in the military) and are having to be two people all the time and are simply too worn out to do as much as they'd like and as much as their children need.

I know parents who simply don't care a whit about their kids excepting the gubbmt check they get to feed and clothe them.

But let's "what if" a minute....
What if there weren't gubbmt checks to provide a 'safety net' for those who simply don't know how to survive because they've been getting a gubbmt check all their lives?
What if, instead of in-house suspension, a parent had to come up to the school and babysit their own misbehaving child, or be forced to take them to work with them?
What if a child was humanely and calmly given a swat with a paddle on their back end when they created an issue in the classroom that prevented others from learning? (I had a NUMBER of those and I turned out okay with no lasting emotional or physical scars!)
What if churches actually taught Biblical parenting, accountability and responsibility from their pews instead of the "speaking life" to "prosperity" gospel?
What if principals backed up teachers and told parents they had better make their kid tow the line or they'd get tossed into the street?

.....What if the federal, state and local governments, schools and districts, weren't providing a MYRIAD of ways for parents to avoid having to take personal responsibility for their kids?
.....What if the federal and state government stayed out of the mechanics of education entirely and schools and districts simply gave parents no choice but to have the responsibility for their children they should have assumed once they gave birth to them?

Yes, unfortunately for all of society, Leave It To Beaver is basically only a television show providing a glimpse of what family used to be and may never be again here in America as American values and morals drift further and further outside the scope of those of the '50's.

That doesn't negate the fact that, today, the education establishment, and government at all levels, take power away from parents on a long term and DAILY basis, only to then attack them for not doing 'enough'.

Guess what?  Prophesies are often self-fulfilling and your straw man is on fire.