On the reform of public education

[Rogue 9]

Related to this topic, Joel Klein, chanceller of the New York City public schools, resigned on November 9th. He gave an interview to NPR on his career, which aired on All Things Considered yesterday afternoon. Audio at this link.

MELISSA BLOCK, host:

This is ALL THINGS CONSIDERED from NPR News. I'm Melissa Block.

Now a conversation with the man who has run the country's largest school district for the past eight years.

Joel Klein, chancellor of the New York City schools, has become a national emblem of school reform. And yesterday, he announced that he is stepping down from his post.

During his time as chancellor, Klein closed nearly 100 low-performing schools. He took on teachers' unions over seniority, tenure and performance pay. And he drew much criticism in the process.

Joel Klein joins us from the New York City Department of Education. Welcome to the program.

Mr. JOEL KLEIN (Chancellor, New York City Department of Education): Great to be with you, Melissa.

BLOCK: And Chancellor Klein, you have made performance assessment and ranking of teachers one of the hallmarks of your time as chancellor. I want you to give us your own self-assessment or report card. What grade would you give yourself in your time as chancellor?

Mr. KLEIN: Well, one of the local newspapers gave me an A grade today.

BLOCK: You'll take that?

Mr. KLEIN: I'll live with it. We've made real progress in the city. Probably the most telling statistic is that in the last eight years, graduation rates have gone up consistently, and I think that reflective of a system that's doing a much better job right now.

BLOCK: Let's talk about another telling statistic, one that's run into some trouble. You have been placing a lot of emphasis on test scores to measure progress, and things were looking really good for a while. The test scores soared. The achievement gap between white students and minority students shrank.

And then came this summer, and New York state said those scores had been wrongly inflated, the exams were too easy. And when they recalibrated things, lo and behold, those passing rates plunged back about 25 percent, back to about where they were when you came in, and the racial achievement gap was as wide as ever. So what does that say to you? What happened there?

Mr. KLEIN: Well, a couple of things. First of all, I was one of the people who said that the tests should be made more demanding and supported increasing the number of questions you get right to pass the test.

But let's be clear about something, that this has been studied and analyzed by lots of people. And it was clear that we made real progress and indeed closed the achievement gap. But if takes 40 questions to pass the test instead of 30, obviously fewer people are going to get a failing grade. But if a lot more people get 36 or 38 questions right, that's a whole lot better than getting 25 questions right, and that's what happened.

In addition, on the national tests - and nobody thinks they're inflated, they're called the gold standard - in the national tests, there are four of them, fourth and eighth grade, and we, all in, made 29 points' worth of progress. Twenty-nine points is about three years' worth of learning.

BLOCK: But Chancellor Klein, if you look at that, that racial achievement gap being about 30 points different between white and minority kids. Doesn't that say to you something's not working here, hasn't been working didn't work before and is still not working now?

Mr. KLEIN: What it says is there are 30 points difference on test passage. On the other hand, in terms of the overall scores, we've closed the gap by meaning not just whether you pass or not but this is a scale of one to four, and in that process, we've closed the gap by about a third for our minority students.

What I mean by that is when you want to break these things down, you really want to look with a sort of much finer tool than simply say, well, you either pass or didn't pass. If the average score for white students is 3.2, and the average score for African-Americans is 2.2, that means that the number of whites passing will be much greater. But if the average score goes up to 2.6, that doesn't mean there's going to be a lot more African-Americans passing, but they'll be a lot closer to passage, and that was demonstrated here.

Second of all, on the graduation rates, our graduation rates for African-Americans and Latinos closed the gap - again, not remotely all the way - but closed the gap with our white and Asian students, and the number of African-Americans and Latinos going to the City University went up substantially.

BLOCK: Joel Klein, before you took over as New York City school chancellor, you were a publishing executive. You headed the anti-trust division at the Justice Department. Your successor in New York, Cathleen Black, is the chairwoman of Hearst Magazines. Like you, she's coming in with no experience in education. Is there a downside there, do you think?

Mr. KLEIN: I don't think so because I've got here now a deputy chancellor, there's actually several of them, who are extraordinary lifetime career educators in this system. What Cathleen Black brings, which I think is critical, is the management expertise. What I think has been missing from large segments of public education is the ability to manage, to hold people accountable, to understand budgets, human resources.

We're going to be going through a lot of budget cuts. The problem with public education is it's not operated effectively. It's operated as a political organization.

The person who said it best, and it's my favorite quote from eight-plus years, was Al Shanker, who was the head of the union here in New York, the teachers' union. He said: If education is not about teachers, performance and student outcomes, then we're playing a game about power.

It's got to be about whether students and teachers and administrators are performing. That's a core principle of accountability that applies in the business community, and it applies as well in the academic communities.

BLOCK: Well, Chancellor Klein, thanks for talking with us.

Mr. KLEIN: My pleasure, thank you.

BLOCK: Joel Klein is stepping down as New York City schools chancellor. He'll be joining Rupert Murdock's News Corporation.

To summarize, as made clear by Mr. Klein's statements about his successor, he believes that public education's problem is inefficient management, certainly not overmanagement or a fundamentally flawed basic structure. Additionally, it strikes me as more than a little unfair to make things all about holding teachers accountable for their performance and then turning around and shackling their ability to control their own performance by dictating how they will teach their subjects with no reference to the needs of their individual students. I don't know much about how Mr. Klein has run the New York City Department of Education, but in light of what we've been discussing here, what he seems to advocate in this interview is directly counter to where most of those commenting in this thread think we should take the course of reform.

[CaptainChewbacca]

The bit about holding teachers accountable goes beyond just punishing bad teachers; recognition of GOOD teachers is something that rarely (if ever) happens, and we need to hold teachers accountable so we cna find out what they are doing RIGHT and not just how they're messing up.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Saw that. It pretty much jives with what I learned in grad school--in addition to teaching methodology, I studied the history of education reform. There was an ideological struggle in the early 20th century between the followers of John Dewey, who advocated a more individualistic model of education, and those of industrial reformer Fredrick Taylor, who wanted to reform schools for maximum efficiency, using the same methods Taylor was advocating for industrial production. Taylor's followers won, and that's the paradigm we've been using for the last 100 years.

Which is why I want a WWDD? bumper sticker--What Would Dewey Do?

However, in the case of ADHD itself, the speaker is an ignoramus. Ritalin is not, as he would have it, a drug designed to deaden the senses, to shut down anything. What these CS derivates have in common is that they do the exact opposite, i.e. what he advocates.

As someone who was prescribed them... No. No they do not. They make you focuses and aware, but that is not the same thing as the opposite of deadening the senses. They make you unaware of things outside the confines of what you are focused on. You miss the proverbial forest through the trees.

Then you toss them into college, and the colleges are stuck teaching them how to write a paper, how to research, how to answer a question where you can't just look back in the chapter for the bolded keywords. It's fucking ridiculous.

OH. MY.GOD!

I have had to watch this progression take place, being the last cohort that went through AZ high schools without standardized testing. There is a noticeable student quality gradient. The farther along you go, the worst the students get. I have noticed a difference in the quality of my freshman bio students from my first year here, to the third. They have gotten worse.

[Eleas]

However, in the case of ADHD itself, the speaker is an ignoramus. Ritalin is not, as he would have it, a drug designed to deaden the senses, to shut down anything. What these CS derivates have in common is that they do the exact opposite, i.e. what he advocates.

As someone who was prescribed them... No. No they do not. They make you focuses and aware, but that is not the same thing as the opposite of deadening the senses. They make you unaware of things outside the confines of what you are focused on. You miss the proverbial forest through the trees.

I don't, and your description is one I don't recognize at all. The type of hyperfocus you describe is something to which I was quite prone before treatment began. Now, the Concerta allows me to actually shunt impressions fluidly and handle input that otherwise, yes, definitely would deaden my senses. I am actually far more aware while on my Concerta than I've been at any other point in my life. I will grant you that my ADHD isn't as crippling as that of others, but it's certainly not mild.

Although now you've made me I'm curious. You're the first one with ADHD symptoms (which you have, right?) I've heard saying such things. Could it be that you're an outlier case, or that my impression of how it's "supposed to be" has been coloured by my own experience?

[Eleas]

Shit; sorry, all, for the obvious albeit accidental threadjack. In my meagre defence it's the night before That Big Test, so I'm scatter-brained. Aly, if you want, we could take it over PM; I'd really like to know your views on the matter.

[Alyrium Denryle]

However, in the case of ADHD itself, the speaker is an ignoramus. Ritalin is not, as he would have it, a drug designed to deaden the senses, to shut down anything. What these CS derivates have in common is that they do the exact opposite, i.e. what he advocates.

As someone who was prescribed them... No. No they do not. They make you focuses and aware, but that is not the same thing as the opposite of deadening the senses. They make you unaware of things outside the confines of what you are focused on. You miss the proverbial forest through the trees.

I don't, and your description is one I don't recognize at all. The type of hyperfocus you describe is something to which I was quite prone before treatment began. Now, the Concerta allows me to actually shunt impressions fluidly and handle input that otherwise, yes, definitely would deaden my senses. I am actually far more aware while on my Concerta than I've been at any other point in my life. I will grant you that my ADHD isn't as crippling as that of others, but it's certainly not mild.

Although now you've made me I'm curious. You're the first one with ADHD symptoms (which you have, right?) I've heard saying such things. Could it be that you're an outlier case, or that my impression of how it's "supposed to be" has been coloured by my own experience?

Well, I have the symptoms, but there is every possibility it was a misdiagnosis (what with something I DO have often being misdiagnosed as ADD/ADHD). And it was Ritalin, as opposed to one of the newer generations drugs.

[Eleas]

Although now you've made me I'm curious. You're the first one with ADHD symptoms (which you have, right?) I've heard saying such things. Could it be that you're an outlier case, or that my impression of how it's "supposed to be" has been coloured by my own experience?

Well, I have the symptoms, but there is every possibility it was a misdiagnosis (what with something I DO have often being misdiagnosed as ADD/ADHD). And it was Ritalin, as opposed to one of the newer generations drugs.

Ok, you getting a blunter effect from it would certainly explain the difference. I've commonly found that biological systems can see-saw during such circumstances, so I'm not surprised that by using a similar class of drugs you might have ended up in the exact place I wanted to escape.


Anyway, I'll explain - in an attempt to get this vaguely back on track to the OP - why I feel the point was worth noting. I'm of the opinion that we should not, in fact, try to wake the children up by stimulating them more. I feel that stimuli is already being provided, and at levels beyond some children's ability to parse. It's just not engaging stimuli - you're literally captive audience to an endless stream of information, part of it obviously drivel and delivered as such by justifiably apathetic teachers.

But there will be a test regardless, and you're told you had best define your self-worth and future plans according to what you manage to retain and parse from said torrent of listless trivia. Meaning you can't ever relax. This shit is important. All of it, potentially. And yet in the end it very often comes down to rote memorization, which not everyone does well.


The speaker could be forgiven for lumping ADHD medicines in the same category as prozac, but I think it muddies the water. IMHO, if used properly, CS-type medicine such as Concerta will shore up on your ability to function despite a torrent of useless yet allegedly vital information crashing over you, but it only works so far. I view ADHD medicine as treatment for injuries caused by cumulative information overload, not as a viable method of addressing the underlying problem: that of of being kept in a fundamentally stressful and unstimulating state.

If I'm right, increasing the pressure upon the student body as some kind of 'solution' (which seems to be the most expedient way of "raising standards", i.e. you simply interpret "standards" as "the bar") would be ludicrous. A significant part of what they're doing is make-work, and they know it. In such situations, grading criteria seem arbitrary anyway, and raising them isn't likely to motivate anyone.

[Rogue 9]

If I'm right, increasing the pressure upon the student body as some kind of 'solution' (which seems to be the most expedient way of "raising standards", i.e. you simply interpret "standards" as "the bar") would be ludicrous. A significant part of what they're doing is make-work, and they know it. In such situations, grading criteria seem arbitrary anyway, and raising them isn't likely to motivate anyone.

I don't think the speaker is interpreting "standards" as "the bar," at least for students. It wouldn't fit at all with the rest of his presentation if he did; it's far more likely he refers to the standard of quality of the education, not in simply making it harder to attain a passing grade.

Joel Klein, on the other hand, said he did exactly that while chancellor of the NYC schools, so if that's what you're talking about then never mind.

[Eleas]

I don't think the speaker is interpreting "standards" as "the bar," at least for students. It wouldn't fit at all with the rest of his presentation if he did; it's far more likely he refers to the standard of quality of the education, not in simply making it harder to attain a passing grade.

Joel Klein, on the other hand, said he did exactly that while chancellor of the NYC schools, so if that's what you're talking about then never mind.

No, you're right. But the notion of simply proposing that standards should be raised is, as the speaker points out, a common one. And all too often, this translates into "just make it harder!" Klein is hardly the only one to make that leap, just a particularly obnoxious practitioner.

I'd love to be proven wrong on this score, mind you, but I'm not optimistic.

[Alyrium Denryle]

If I'm right, increasing the pressure upon the student body as some kind of 'solution' (which seems to be the most expedient way of "raising standards", i.e. you simply interpret "standards" as "the bar") would be ludicrous. A significant part of what they're doing is make-work, and they know it. In such situations, grading criteria seem arbitrary anyway, and raising them isn't likely to motivate anyone.

I don't think the speaker is interpreting "standards" as "the bar," at least for students. It wouldn't fit at all with the rest of his presentation if he did; it's far more likely he refers to the standard of quality of the education, not in simply making it harder to attain a passing grade.

Joel Klein, on the other hand, said he did exactly that while chancellor of the NYC schools, so if that's what you're talking about then never mind.

As far as standards for students, we do need to raise them. I saw the transition late in undergrad, and now with my own students what has happened with standardized testing. There is no ability to synthesize information, and draw logical conclusions from information. That is because they have been taught to a rote-memorization multiple choice test for years. They can plug and chug an equation they know, because they memorized how by rote, but if I write an equation on the board, they dont know what a summation function is, and they fail at basic order of operations. They never had writing assignments that actually critique their ability to write, so their grammar and logic structure are both piles of rancid shit.

What the system needs is a kick in the teeth. Kids need to learn how to think and communicate, not just regurgitate facts. They need courses in propositional and symbolic logic that incorporate written elements that get graded for content and not just completion. They need courses in English GRAMMAR, and I do not mean Hooked on Phonics, I mean a high school course devoted to linguistics, with a special emphasis on English. They need to learn morphology, phenology and syntax. History classes need to tell a story about history, teach them how events are links in a causal chain and not just names, dates, and places to memorize. Geography class should be a course in basic geology and climatology more than it is about memorizing different landforms.

The whole structure of our education system needs to change, and if you want to test that stuff, make it an exam like the LSAT.

[Phantasee]

Seriously? You're talking about one of the hardest exams anyone will write, that is usually written after a student has done most of an undergrad, and you want everybody in highschool to take it?

[RedImperator]

Seriously? You're talking about one of the hardest exams anyone will write, that is usually written after a student has done most of an undergrad, and you want everybody in highschool to take it?

I think he said "like the LSAT", not "the LSAT", full stop.

Geography class should be a course in basic geology and climatology more than it is about memorizing different landforms.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha! Geography class! That's a good one.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Seriously? You're talking about one of the hardest exams anyone will write, that is usually written after a student has done most of an undergrad, and you want everybody in highschool to take it?

I think he said "like the LSAT", not "the LSAT", full stop.

Yes. LSATesque. Similar question structure. Not necessarily the LSAT proper.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha! Geography class! That's a good one.

I had one in middle school....

[Simon_Jester]

I had a year of "Social Studies" that might as well have been labeled "Geography." Nothing would have changed much.

[Kyler]

I believe one of the major problems with the American educational system is that is wants children to take harder and harder classes that really have no baring on their future life. Right now kids all across America are taking classes in subjects that really will do them will no benefit in the future. In high school, kids are told you need to do your best s you can go to college and you need to try to take advance placement class to gain college credit. Kids take AP Physics, Calculus, & other courses that have nothing to with their future careers. I dated a girl once who was taking AP Calculus in HS, I asked her what she planed on majoring in college? She said either an Accountant or Dental Hygienist, and I asked why would go take Calculus that will really have nothing to with either career? She said her school consular told her it was more important than taking a class in statistics or biology. My first two years in college I was an Professional Pilot major, all students had to take Calculus. We often complained that Calculus was not needed since pilots use very little of it, but the Dean of our program actually told me that it made our program look better. So students not only had to waste their money but also their time by taking a math class that was not needed for their degree but just intended to make the school's program better.

Core curriculum's of Colleges & Universities are a bunch of bullshit. As an Professional Piloting major, why should I have to take Creative Writing, Psychology, or World History. How are any of those classes going to have any bearing in future career as a pilot. It all fluff to allow schools to make more money. Most college degrees probably require a minimum of 125 credit hours today, how much of that is crap that is nothing to do with a major. Maybe 40 credit hours or more depending on the school. Since an average college students take 15 credit hours a semester that almost 1 1/2 years taking B.S. classes. You want a way to make college cheaper for everyone stop making them take health classes that nearly every state already teaches in high school. Stop making a engineering major take a film class and stop making a English Lit major take College Algebra.

I can honestly say really none of "College Prep" classes prepared me for college. I was taught in HS that all college papers are done in the same format. That was a bunch of bull shit. Every professor had their own format you had to use.

The video linked above is very good, and I enjoyed the speakers point of view. It is important to realize that not everyone learns the same way and at the same speed. Children should be grouped together in the same levels and types of learning they excel in. All not every child is able to go to college and shouldn't be told they can because they want to. At this time modern educators recognize 10 different forms of learning, and the list is continuing to grow. Depending on the form of learning some kids will never be good at math, science, or writing but will excel in other areas. Educators need to start recognizing this and funneling children into programs that suit their learning style. They will be happier and more successful in the future instead of being taught the mindless garbage that is taught in most schools today.

[Simon_Jester]

Core curriculum's of Colleges & Universities are a bunch of bullshit. As an Professional Piloting major, why should I have to take Creative Writing, Psychology, or World History. How are any of those classes going to have any bearing in future career as a pilot. It all fluff to allow schools to make more money. Most college degrees probably require a minimum of 125 credit hours today, how much of that is crap that is nothing to do with a major. Maybe 40 credit hours or more depending on the school.

Basically, your complaint is that schools are trying to turn out people who know a little of everything (which takes time and money) instead of doing vocational education. I can understand the logic, but it really isn't a good thing when everyone who doesn't "need" history to do their job is a historical illiterate, for example. Nor is it a good thing when people who want a college degree have trouble with the use of indefinite articles and question marks.

[PainRack]

When I was student teaching, I had a kid who was kind of a fuckup. Good kid, really--not a gangbanger, not vicious--but a big mouth, didn't like authority, was obviously bored shitless by school and thought it was a big waste of his time. Send him to the salt mines, right?

Well, I assigned them a project where they had to teach a ten minute lesson of their choice (don't ask; the class was called "problems in urban education" or something, and I had to write the curriculum myself because the school had no idea what it was supposed to be). This kid went first; he was going to teach how to cut hair. I'm thinking he's going to come in with a pair of scissors, maybe an electric trimmer. Kid shows up with an entire fucking barber kit and actually gives another student a damn haircut in class. Did a good job, too! Best performance I ever got out of him in class; I talked to him after class, and all he wanted to do with his life was be a barber. You want to know how many kids told me they wanted to be rap producers or basketball players? As far as I can remember, this was the first student I had with an actual realistic career goal.

Now, someone explain to me why forcing that kid to sit in classes he hated, in a "college prep" program that wouldn't actually prepare him for college even if he planned on going, is a better use of time and money than teaching him how to cut hair and, maybe, how to run a business so if he ever wanted to start his own shop, he'd at least have some grounding in the basics. How many boys in that school would have been happier learning how to fix cars, or build houses, or run wires, or cook? How many girls would have rather learned how to braid hair, or take bloodwork? Meanwhile, do you know that school's college graduation rate? Not the rate of students who graduate with high school diplomas, or go on to college, but actually make it all the way through all four years of college and finish with a bachelors degree?

One percent.

Incidentally, the school district of Philadelphia does have one vocational training high school. There's a waiting list to get in it as long as my leg.

But I hear vocational training is a waste of money.

But.... but.... how would he be prepared for the New ECONOMY? !?!?!?!?!


Screw the New Economy. The emphasis on how IT has changed everything has utterly neglected the fact that not everyone is going to be an investment banker, service manager or whatnot. You still need the bottom rung of the ladder, and what should be done is training those servicemen and etc how to stand up for themselves so they can compete and not be slaughtered by other more devios people such as managers and other businessmen.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I believe one of the major problems with the American educational system is that is wants children to take harder and harder classes that really have no baring on their future life. Right now kids all across America are taking classes in subjects that really will do them will no benefit in the future. In high school, kids are told you need to do your best s you can go to college and you need to try to take advance placement class to gain college credit. Kids take AP Physics, Calculus, & other courses that have nothing to with their future careers. I dated a girl once who was taking AP Calculus in HS, I asked her what she planed on majoring in college? She said either an Accountant or Dental Hygienist, and I asked why would go take Calculus that will really have nothing to with either career? She said her school consular told her it was more important than taking a class in statistics or biology.

And that counselor was right. Without calculus, you might be able to do statistics, but they are just equations. To understand statistics, you need a solid grasp of calculus, which as an accounting major, she will have to take anyway.

Same thing with being dental hygienist, which requires training in biology before professional schools. Guess what you need for that? Calculus, and in university, Calc will be a fuckton harder because the class gets used as weed out course for premeds and engineering majors. Taking AP calc is the more logical choice.

My first two years in college I was an Professional Pilot major, all students had to take Calculus. We often complained that Calculus was not needed since pilots use very little of it, but the Dean of our program actually told me that it made our program look better. So students not only had to waste their money but also their time by taking a math class that was not needed for their degree but just intended to make the school's program better.

Gee, maybe you should be able to understand what your computer spits out at you. In the old days, pilots used to do that stuff by hand if I remember properly. This way, if something goes wrong, you know how to diagnose a problem.

Fuckstick.

Core curriculum's of Colleges & Universities are a bunch of bullshit. As an Professional Piloting major, why should I have to take Creative Writing, Psychology, or World History. How are any of those classes going to have any bearing in future career as a pilot.

Having a broad education is useful because you will leave university not being profoundly ignorant of all other subjects but those directly pertaining to your major. It helps you make informed decisions, and have a better grounding in the world. When I was an undergraduate, I took extra classes in religious studies, philosophy, women and gender studies, and psychology. Guess what. I use all of those in my daily life. Ethics informs my decision making, religious studies has helped me to understand people from different cultural groups and actually KNOW shit about people's religions and thus be capable of being rational with respect to things like the "Ground Zero" mosque. How many people who are worked up about that ever learned a god damn thing about Islam? Psychology and women's studies courses helped me in so many ways, I cannot even begin to tell you.

Shut the fuck up, and have fun with your electives. University is about teaching you how to think. It is not and should not be just a vocational program.

It all fluff to allow schools to make more money. Most college degrees probably require a minimum of 125 credit hours today, how much of that is crap that is nothing to do with a major.

It does do that, but it also makes sure students leave a little bit smarter than they were when they went in. Would you like to know what University was like BEFORE they started being treated like businesses? Everyone learned latin, and at least one other language. They were required to read and understand classic greek, roman, and Renaissance literature

If I had my way, degree programs would be extended by two years, and required coursework in majors would be increased, mathematics through calculus 1 and statistics would be required for everyone, as well as the intro series in biology, chemistry, and physics. Bring back mandatory latin, and make everyone take a class in symbolic logic.

Maybe 40 credit hours or more depending on the school. Since an average college students take 15 credit hours a semester that almost 1 1/2 years taking B.S. classes. You want a way to make college cheaper for everyone stop making them take health classes that nearly every state already teaches in high school.

HAHAHAHAHAhAhAHAHAHAH!

So you want to make the value of a college education less than it has already degenerated to? Newsflash: Health education in US High Schools Sucks. You can tell from the rate of STI infections in your average freshman dorm.

Stop making a engineering major take a film class and stop making a English Lit major take College Algebra.

So the engineers have no appreciation for anything other than Statics, and the english lit major cannot calculate how much paint they need to buy in order to redecorate their house? No thanks.

I can honestly say really none of "College Prep" classes prepared me for college. I was taught in HS that all college papers are done in the same format. That was a bunch of bull shit. Every professor had their own format you had to use.

That says nothing about the intrinsic usefullness of the class.

1) HS education in the US sucks a brass nut
2) It is about teaching you how to form coherent thoughts, and write decently. The format matters far less than teaching you that basic skill, and if you cannot pick up an assignment and write in a form other than a five paragraph essay using 3 MLA citations, you do not deserve to be in college.

I say this after having just written a 45 page dissertation proposal with well over 110 citations.

The video linked above is very good, and I enjoyed the speakers point of view. It is important to realize that not everyone learns the same way and at the same speed. Children should be grouped together in the same levels and types of learning they excel in.

Oh look, we agree on something. With the caveat that the student is made to develop the skills they do not excel in.

All not every child is able to go to college and shouldn't be told they can because they want to. At this time modern educators recognize 10 different forms of learning, and the list is continuing to grow. Depending on the form of learning some kids will never be good at math, science, or writing but will excel in other areas.

That does not mean that those kids should be able to leave with those skills undeveloped at some rudimentary level. If you do that, you end up with the Tea Party.

[Archaic`]

Just to second some of the sentiments expressed earlier in this thread, may I just state that it's fucking ridiculous that I'm having to teach first year undergraduate students how to write a report (as opposed to an essay), or what an executive summary is, or that a reference list isn't the same thing as a bibliography. Don't even get me started on the idiots who think Wikipedia is a good source either. It's at the point now where the faculty at both uni's I do classes at are considering implementing mandatory basic skills courses in the first semester. Not that I think it'll have much effect even if put in place. Most students, by the time they are to us, only seem to care about passing and nothing else. Meanwhile, the teachers who actually try to make the kids learn, who give them challenging assignments to actually make them think, get savaged in the student feedback. There's certainly a culture amongst some that you should avoid failing students as much as possible, simply because they're afraid it'll lead to suggestions that they can't teach well and that they'll get fired.