This is crazy, or is it?
We learned the other day that Texas Instruments is a big promoter of Algebra 2 as a graduation requirement in Texas. Why? Civic spirit, love of education, or the fact that TI supplies most of the graphing calculators needed for Algebra 2?
Now we learn from this report that a company selling cursive writing materials is a major proponent of a law requiring same in North Carolina.
Please do not misunderstand the issue here.
I believe that everyone should learn cursive writing, both to do it and to read it.
But I don’t believe that state legislatures should dictate how teachers teach or what methods are best.
I also am a firm believer in the value of knowing the multiplication table by heart, but I don’t think that lawmakers should mandate it.
I love memorizing poetry but that should not be subject to legislation either.
States like North Carolina should have high standards for teachers. They should have at least a year of study and practice before entering the classroom. They should pass tests in the subject they plan to teach. They should have support and mentors.
If they are truly professionals, let them teach.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
What percentage of North Carolina teachers have degrees in the area they teach?
Pretty irrelevant for about half the teachers – those who don’t teach particular subjects, such as elementary school teachers and special ed teachers.
Another funny (not ha ha) thing is that many teachers who do have degrees in particular subjects aren’t teaching in those fields. My best friend from high school has a bachelor’s in physics and math (as well as education) and her school currently has her teaching remedial reading, computers and “life skills” for eighth grade Amish girls who won’t be going on to high school (and one class of freshman chem/phys). Only one math teacher and none of the science teachers in her building have degrees in their field.
Right, I meant for teachers who teach particular subjects.
Why not require math teachers to have degrees in math? That would seem like a pretty straightforward piece of “education reform.”
Flerp: good luck finding science and math graduates who want to teach in a southern state like North Carolina. The pay is disgusting.
This is pretty old data, but unless things have changed dramatically, this is a nationwide issue that affects Massachusetts (or at least once did) and North Carolina alike:
http://tinyurl.com/cqf9ynp
I almost couldn’t believe my eyes when I opened an email message from The Johns Hopkins School of Education to inform me about a doctoral program titled, “Entrepreneurial Leadership in Education”.
They are just looking to get a piece of the salary increase you would get from the additional degree.
“Entrepreneurial Leadership in Education”.
I think the larger issue is that JHU is legitimizing the exploitation of public schools by establishing a PhD program with that title. The biggest problem in education today are all the Entrepreneurial Leaders currently sucking the life out of scarce public school resources.
The market system is on a feeding frenzy, swallowing everything in reach–public schools, public parks, public hospitals, public airwaves, public airspace, public streets…Anything that can be monetized and marketized is now a target, including our genome. This is the latest phase of what’s been called “neoliberalism” which defines people not as citizens of a democratic society with political rights but rather as consumers in a marketplace with commercial choices to buy this good or that service. Any “public good” is a target for private seizure by billionaires. We need a coalition of folks and groups from the bottom up to counter the vast money of the few with the vast numbers of the many. Massive, organized opposition and refusal to cooperate(like Opt-Out from tests, strike in Chicago, boycott in Seattle and Protland, walkouts in Newark, etc.)are the roads to a democratic society. We need regional mtgs to set up leadership to organize more of this, and to link up with any non-educ activist org’s in other sector willing to fight back from below.
This one phrase, Diane, sums up the WHOLE debate, I think.
If they are professionals, let them teach.
Amen to that.
Another ludicrous piece of legislation is the federal mandate that all students be taught about the U.S. Constitution every September 17. How meaningful is this for young children, especially kindergartners? Sure, we talk about rules for our classroom and watch the “History Rocks” video to say we’ve covered it, but the U.S. Constitution is not that meaningful in the life of a four year-old.
We have that law in Utah, too. I teach History, but I’m nowhere near the Constitution by Sept. 17, so I have to stop what I’m doing, teach the Constitution, and then tell the kids that it’s a “preview of coming attractions” when we REALLY get to the Constitution and spend three weeks on it in December.
And don’t get me started on the fact that I now have to teach my students that the United States is not a democracy, but a “Constitutional Compound Republic.” While technically true, it’s just confusing to the 8th graders.
Want crazy, try this out!!
The Texas Legislature has taken an interest in approving or disapproving of the lessons that thousands of Texas teachers use on a daily basis in Language Arts, Science, Math, and Social Studies. Good deeds never go unpunished, so it is with CScope. If your not familiar with CScope, it was developed by education service centers (a coop was created) in response to the midsize and small district need for curriculum. This alone saves our district about $200K a year (I’m being conservative). It is being attacked by the TEA Party and others ( a former teacher who writes curriculum and can’t sell it to some districts because they are satisfied with CScope) . Politicians, being politicians, don’t miss many chances for center stage and some have joined the fray. Clearly unimportant to them is the law of unintended consequence, it will collectively cost districts (read tax payers) millions of dollars to replace this product. The opponents want to throw the baby out with the bath water, reasonable people might say lets correct questionable lessons and inevitable editing errors. I suppose that wouldn’t make good headlines.
Back to the point, sorry. The legislatures response so far has been to assign review of all lessons to the State School Board of Texas (Google them, I dare you ; -). The president of the Board will convene committees to do the reviewing. This Board was stripped of most of its responsibilities for textbook review because of its ridiculous shenanigans several years back (Google that too). Another response is to propose that the Commissioner of Education have final approval over all products and services provided to schools districts by the Education Service Centers. (I know many of you see the potential problems with this arrangement. I predict that the Commissioner will be inundated with offers from your favorite Reformers among others)
The problem that is coming to light is the massive loss of local decision making responsibility. Stay tuned for upset tax payers:-)
I’m sorry, I left off an important bit of information relevant to the expertise of the Texas Commissioner of Education. At a state wide conference of Administrators and School Board Members this man made one of the most uninformed statements about quality instruction I have ever heard. He stated that he was OK with not restoring 300 million dollars to a instructional remediation fund (SSI) because the state was providing two on-line computer programs for districts to use (no cost to us).
Those funds were being used to pay for small group remediation, remediation materials, one to one instruction, etc (aka Person to Person interaction with kids) that educators had apparently mistakenly assumed was more effective than computer programs.
Go figure.
To FLERP
Some background (of which you may or may not be aware) regarding out of field teachers:
Before NCLB teachers (at lease in the states I am familiar with) could teach a % of the day “out of field”. That % was less than half. These teachers were fully certified in one area, but often, out of interest/experience/and sometimes necessity, would teach one class in another area.
For example:
I have multiple degrees in biology, but I used to teach a theater class in addition to the various levels of bio.
So, despite many years of professional theater experience, I have no certification/ degree in theater, and for years I “counted” as an out of field ELA teacher (Drama is in the ELA dept. here.)
I know many teachers who would volunteer/ get drafted to provide an elective in an area of interest/passion/experience. We used to have a business teacher who had no degree in science, but had been a cop for many years. He taught the forensic science elective and did a great job.
NCLB killed my drama elective (it was given to a “qualified” english teacher who ,by her own admission, knew nothing about theater and did not want to teach it so the program died), and the science dept. had to take over forensic science, even though none of us knew anything about it.
I am not sure either of these situations was a win for the students.
My point (and I do have one)… although I generally agree that it is good to have a degree in what you teach, we lost many excellent electives when the law changed.
As to southern states lacking science teachers, not in my experience. But then again metro Atlanta has many colleges and universities (both in the city and near by), and young people often want to stay in the ATL, so we have not had any trouble attracting science teachers (with science degrees) in the metro counties. I suspect it is the same in other states. The cities (especially those with colleges and univ. near by) do fine, but the rural areas have a tough time recruiting.
thx
Diane writes:
“They should pass tests in the subject they plan to teach.”
Is this a requirement for teachers in New York State? Are the tests challenging?
In New York, we take a Content Specialty Exam. It is not easy. You need to study. Multiple choice questions and an essay. Several hours involved. ( I’ve been certified since 2002, I can’t speak to any changes since then.)
Diane, while I agree with you 99% of the time I gotta disagree on cursive writing. I just can’t do it, and Mrs. Shaheen my 3rd grade teacher in 1968 would concur. I print when I write, because it’s legible. Cursive will go go the way of Latin at some point in the next 200 years. It will always be there, but it’s not necessary for a good education, or to be successful. If there’s anybody out there lobbying for it, they’re braindead.
If you cannot do it by hand you do not know it. Ask the military academies if they make sure their students have to know how to work without a computer. The war does not stop when your computer goes down and you had better know the trajectory before you die.
Honestly with all the other crazy bills regarding education in my home state, this is the least of the evils. However, I don’t like the business behind this, or any other education bill. Judging by my 83- year-old mother’s beautiful handwriting, my vote is for the Palmer method.
RE Diane’s comment on “Cursive Writing, follow the money”
Dang!
I agree on these Diane statements!!!!
“I believe that everyone should learn cursive writing, both to do it and to read it.
But I don’t believe that state [or federal?] legislatures should dictate how teachers teach
or what methods are best.
I also am a firm believer in the value of knowing the multiplication table by heart, but I don’t
think that lawmakers should mandate it.
I love memorizing poetry but that should not be subject to legislation either.”
I agree 100%!!!
Educating yourself as a 1st grader, a middle schooler, a high schooler,
a college student or a Ph.D. student is hard work. Do it and you will succeed in life.
Parents must teach their kids this ethic.
That is my view.