Going to Summer School used to be the expected fate of Canadian high school students who either failed or performed poorly in academic credit courses. In the old days, summer school functioned as a kind of purgatory for struggling students and for “slackers” who drifted through high school. A recent Toronto Globe and Mail news feature, “Are kids failing at summer?” (July 7, 2012), unearthed new data from school boards in British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario demonstrating that it’s now become a haven for “anxious students aiming for higher grades.” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/are-kids-failing-at-summer/article4397211/?page=all
Typical of the new breed of Summer School students is Chris Stojanovski, a 90% Whitby, Ontario student, who has completed Grade 10 and is currently taking Grade 11 English this summer. While his fellow students lined-up for a matinee showing of The Amazing Spiderman, Chris could be found hunched over his desk in a stark flourescent lit classroom studying literary devices in Robert Burns’ A Red, Red Rose. He’s back in class to get a head start on Grade 11 and it was his decision.
Summer School has certainly changed in recent years. High achieving students are gradually replacing struggling students in the traditional five-week high school credit course programs. For a variety of reasons, they are choosing to forgo that first job, roaming shopping malls, and summer camp to “reach forward” and capitalize on opportunities to raise their marks. Academic upgrading and credit recovery are becoming a thing of the past and it is time to ask why.
Summer School student enrolment is growing at a time when fewer and fewer students are actually failing courses from Grades 7 to 12 in Canadian schools. Over the past five years, B.C. summer school enrolment has increased from 1,165 to 46,666, a 40-fold increase. Some 85% of Summer School students in the York Region District School Board are now taking courses for the first time rather than seeking academic upgrading. Similar trends have been identified in the Calgary Public School Board and in the Durham District Board, just east of Toronto.
Some Canadian school boards still operate under the old principles while implementing “no fail” student assessment policies. The Halifax Regional School Board, for example, with 16 junior and senior high schools and 49,500 students, continues to run a Summer School at one location, offering Grade 7 to 12 five-week courses in only Mathematics and Language Arts/English. It’s a shrunken down traditional program running week days from July 5 to August 8 and scheduled for 8:30 am until 1 pm. Students grades are “entirely based on course assessment during summer school.” http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/content/id/953.html
Mark inflation, rising student attainment levels, and “no fail’ student assessment policies have radically reduced the traditional market for Summer School programs — struggling students who might benefit from upgrading in weak subjects. Failing subjects is becoming rarer and Statistics Canada (2009) reports that 86.7% of young Canadians ages 25 to 29 now have high school graduation diplomas. Eliminating any sign of failure in schools has a way of reducing the need for high school credit recovery programs.
Three years ago, Ontario high school teachers complained about the spread of “no fail” policies, linking such policies to provincially-set targets to raise graduation rates. Deputy education minister Dr. Ben Levin responded with a four-page memo defending the system. When Toronto Sun columnist Moira MacDonald interviewed him, Levin, who is quite influential in Canadian education circles, claimed that, although students shouldn’t be given marks they did not earn, he believed students were also “demotivated” by failure. http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/moira_macdonald/2009/05/19/9496746-sun.html
“No fail” policies appeal to students and parents but they raise the ire of many teachers. High school teachers have coined terms such as “pseudo-credits” and “credit lite” to describe new alternative learning courses such as “credit recovery” catering to students at risk of dropping out. Fewer students are falling through the cracks, but it’s getting harder and harder to fail a course and repeating a grade is now next to impossible. Once limited to elected or optional high school courses, “social promotion” is now common, even in Mathematics, Science, and English courses.
Some 5,000 citizens, mostly high school teachers, signed an online petition in April 2009 registering opposition to the province’s “no failure” policy with regard to high school students. ( http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/evaluation) Students who miss tests because they skip class or even cheat on a test cannot be marked “zero” but instead must be given another chance. Teachers in the Toronto region have also complained that the pressure to graduate more students has created a boon in students marching off to private school “credit factories” to pick up credits in subjects they might barely scratch through at public school.
Edmonton high school physics teacher, Lynden Dorval, has become a hero for defending high school marking standards. He simply refused to implement his school’s “no zero” policy and, after 35 years of teaching, is now facing dismissal for his actions. He wasn’t even handing out zeros for poor work. His “radical” move was doling out zero for work not done at all, or skipped tests — after students were given chances to make them up. Even though his Senior Physics course was an IB Diploma course expected to adhere to rigorous international standards, it didn’t matter to his principal who insisted that he code the work as “unable to assess” and assign grades based only on work a student actually completed. http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/moira_macdonald/2009/05/19/9496746-sun.html
Today’s high schools focus on raising student attainment levels, seeking to sustain higher graduation rates. Summer Schools for struggling students are acquiring a new mandate — supporting highly motivated, academically able students to “reach ahead” and secure higher grades for university admissions purposes. “Failure” is now a dirty word in school, and so damaging to student self-esteem, that it is to be avoided through social promotion. That is why traditional Summer Schools are dying on the vine.
What’s happening to Summer Schools across Canada? Why are student enrolments rising in academic acceleration courses? What has caused the decline in academic credit course offerings catering to struggling academic students? How have mark inflation and “no failure” policies impacted upon Canadian summer school enrolments?
Students are also finding it increasingly difficult to find summer time employment, with student unemployment now at it’s highest point since 1977:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/07/11/pol-students-youth-jobless-rate-high.html
Without a summer job, academic courses are an appealing option for some students. They get a head start on the upcoming school year by taking one or two courses to lighten up their course load, while working on subjects they need to graduate. This allows them to take a spare period the following year or enroll in an extra extra elective.
(I know from personal experience attending Chinook College in Calgary one summer in Grade 9)
It will be interesting to see what happens summer school enrolment now that online courses are becoming more available for credit. Millions of students across the world are expected to enroll in free courses from the University of Toronto, Stanford, Princeton, and a dozen other schools through a new website Coursera launched by two Stanford computer scientists.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/online-university-for-the-masses/article4426073/
If students prefer to sit in their basements with their laptops than a hot classroom in July, could we see summer school enrolment decline?
David you have a good point. Online learning is growing. See today’s School for Though blog at SQE as well on this. Who needs bricks and mortar?http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog
Slacking off can still get you high grades at some of Toronto’s summer schools, especially the infamous Toronto Collegiate Institute, in the suburb of Scarborough in East Toronto. Last summer, Toronto Star reporter Jennifer Yang went undercover (September 16, 2011) and made some startling discoveries:
“We were a classroom full of underachievers.
The bright but aloof teenager who failed chemistry because he skipped nearly an entire semester. The bespectacled girl who consistently came to class an hour late and rarely wrote anything down because she took notes “with my mind.”
And then there was me, a Toronto Star reporter posing as a summer school student upgrading her Grade 12 chemistry mark so she could apply for nursing college. I was a mediocre pupil at best: I barely studied, never handed in homework and failed most of my tests.
But after completing a four-week, watered-down chemistry course at a private high school called Toronto Collegiate Institute, or TCI, the three of us walked away with marks we wanted — but did not deserve.
For the month of July, I spent four hours a day in a Scarborough classroom as part of a Star investigation into alleged high school “credit mills,” a growing problem in Ontario where private schools are essentially handing out credits and grades for a fee.
• How Star reporter went undercover as a student
What I observed was troubling: a credit course scheduled for 84 hours of classroom time instead of the 110 minimum required by the Ministry of Education; a teacher assisting students on tests or revealing questions beforehand; a struggling student permitted to rewrite tests she failed, open book; a student granted his credit after registering late and attending only the last week of the class.
Since 2009, the Ministry of Education has received dozens of complaints about private schools inflating marks — at least three were about TCI. One complaint filed by a guidance counsellor last year involved an R.H. King Academy student who had math marks ranging from 28 per cent to 57 per cent. That student went to TCI for Grade 12 calculus and scored 84 per cent.
The ministry is responsible for inspecting private schools but oversight is lax. According to documents obtained through freedom of information requests, TCI was inspected at least four times between 2005 and 2009 and consistently failed to assess and evaluate students in accordance with provincial standards.
Nevertheless, the Scarborough school was allowed to continue operating and granting credits. Between 2005 and 2009, at least 651 students have obtained high school credits from TCI.”
For the full story, see http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1055379–star-investigation-slacking-off-gets-high-marks-at-this-high-school
Comment:
The Toronto Star undercover story provoked quite a reaction and netted 180 comments on the paper’s website. Much of the critical fire was directed at TCI, a private school operator, who was something of an easy target. It also begged the question. Were Summer Schools run by the Toronto District School Board much different? If we were to compare students seeking “credit recovery,” would there be more similarities than differences?
There was a day when certain data streams were not tracked. Too much work, but technology has undone that. I would say, that summer school in the 1970s, and night school had its fair share of overachievers as well as the students who needed courses to move forward.
In 1970 and 1971, I attended summer school and at the only high school that had air conditioning, plus an indoor swimming pool. Nice eh? I only took two courses for each year, and I believed at a cost of $100. But I am not sure about it. since I was not involved in the decision to go to summer school. I was not failing, but the high school and the parents thought my grades in grade 9 math, science, and grade 10 math, english could be a lot higher than the mid-50 grades. A student could take 4 summer courses, two in the morning and two in the afternoon session. Boy, was I surprise to see who had shown up from my high school the first morning. The top-achievers of the crowd, who had parents who either wanted them to repeat a course for a higher grade, or take on extra credited courses. Most of them were farmer kids, like me and not the townies, and so I no longer worried about being teased going to summer school.
In summer school, I came out with a 98 average in grade 9 math and a 99 average in grade 10 math. As for science and grade 10 english, both were in the 80s. The trouble started at the high school, and the math teachers. Both objected to the grades that I received at summer school, and I apparently was not capable of such high grades. My parents kept me out of the loop, and apparently it was my father that came down to have a chat with the math teachers in 1970 and 1971, with the principal and an school board official as referees. Have no idea what was discussed, but my father was a tough customer, especially when dealing with teachers who thought one of his children was not up to snuff in the brain department. I can well imagined what he said to the math teachers, and their knowledge on math. But he probably went after them for their teaching style and methods, and cursed them for the extra expenditures in tutoring, summer school and boarding me out with family friends so I could attend summer school. As for the former English and Science teachers, not a word from them because it was expected. I found out years later, that they thought it was about the stress in grades 9 and 10 math, that started to impact other subjects.
Hasn’t summer school in Ontario, always had the over-achievers, the under-achievers and the low achievers? But since the 90s, summer school has either whittled out the under-achievers or the low achievers and opted for the high achievers where teaching methods, instruction practices don’t matter as much as they do with the under-achievers and the lower achievers?
Without reservations and without hesitation, the low achievers and under-achievers are being written out of the equation in the public education system. And it starts early in the primary grades, and much of it is due to low quality instruction and instruction methods that are geared to the high-achievers of any grade and classroom.
Instruction methods do matter for the bulk of the students, especially for the under-achievers and the low achievers. Unfortunately, both groups are treated with an assortment of practices that keeps them as under-achievers and low achievers along with the subtle currents of lower expectations. To make matters worse, when students do improved with a little bit of help from parents who are willing to either spend their money on tutoring, on-line courses or doing the tutoring themselves, the parents of children who are struggling are seen by the education system, with a cynical eye.
In my day, students the over-achievers could have graduated at the age of 16, using a combination of night school and summer school. And some did, all to anxious to get to university and play with the big boys and girls. However, at a much reduced cost compared to the 21st century. I went to night school, to take courses that interested me, and for a change my father never objected to the costs or driving me to the city, and it was also urged by the high school, since I was the classic under-achiever and I skipped classes that I was bored with, and only showed up for the tests and assignments that were due. I did very well in the night school courses, and received credits for it, Back in the late 60s and early 70s, there was no cap put on the number of credited courses, hence I graduated with 10 extra credits. Now there is caps put on the number of credited courses, and Ontario is leading the charge on that one. Soon to come in other provinces , where caps on the number of credited courses will make an appearance, compliments of the bean counters in the education systems. It will result in more students of the high achievers taking summer school to picked up the science, math and other interesting courses to give them an edge on being accepted at the post-secondary institute of their choice.
Summer school is not meant for the low and under-achievers, and I believe it has more to do with the changes that have been made since the 1990s in the number of courses offer, the reduction in the number of required courses of the core subjects, the pushed in directing students to two streams – the advance and the academic, and where applied and basic are seen as the only options for the labeled students such as LD, the low achievers, and quite an assortment of under-achievers who do remarkable well but face obstacles in moving up to academic courses.
Back in my day, the school and the school board had their focus on the under-achievers, the low achievers and the students who were the top achievers in the commercial and what would be known today as basic courses or vocational streams. Unlike today, where the focus is on the failing students and the high and over-achieving students. It has resulted in squeezing out the under-achievers, and which I suspect are in higher numbers than the failing, high and over-achievers. Under-achievers do not work at their full potential, and boy it is hard to find a defining definition on the under-achievers in the education files. Not a whole lot of research, but in one China school the under-achievers are made to wear green scarfs and the high achievers get to wear red. http://www.chinahush.com/2011/10/18/school-labels-underachieving-students-with-green-scarf/
A more reasonable stance is – “There may be other factors that are keeping him from being successful.”
Read more at Suite101: How Educators Can Help Underachieving Students: Why Kids May Seem Unmotivated and Uninterested in Learning | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/how-educators-can-help-underachieving-students-a195963#ixzz21Rh9JkVy
However, the articles I have read, I have yet to run across instructional and curriculum practices as being one of the factors for failing and under-achieving students.
Today the low and under-achievers are seen through a different lens, that strikes me as a combination of low expectations and outright ignoring the learning needs of both set of students. The urgency is to get the students to pass – a 50 percent. The second issue, is the instruction practices, and I do believed from my own experiences and my children experiences, instruction and pedagogical practices can make or break a student. Paul raises the question – “Were Summer Schools run by the Toronto District School Board much different? If we were to compare students seeking “credit recovery,” would there be more similarities than differences? “
See for yourself – “Arrangements should be made so that one or more of the following options is available to the student:
1. Where possible, the student should be allowed to repeat only the material relating to the overall curricular expectations not achieved. The student may choose to achieve these expectations in summer school, through independent study, through an individualized remediation program, or through distance education. The student’s work will be evaluated to determine whether the expectations have been successfully completed.
2. If available, the student can enrol in a remedial program designed for a group of students with similar needs.
3. The student may decide to repeat the entire course.”
http://www.tdsb.on.ca/_site/viewitem.asp?siteid=110&menuid=3905&pageid=3237
And the brochure – “Credit-recovery programs help students earn the credits they
have previously failed to achieve, as they develop the learning
skills needed for academic success. Provincial credit-recovery
class codes have now been introduced to support greater
timetabling flexibility. “
Click to access strategies.pdf
Back in my day, I earned my summer school math grades of 97 and 98, because of the instruction filling in the missing gaps of math knowledge, and none of it was on basic arithmetic facts. All of the students were well-grounded on basic arithmetic facts. From what I understood, there was about 10 of us in the math class, producing consistent 90s or above, and the rest falling below to grades no lower than a 65 percent. All were given the identical tests, and every inch of grade 9 and 10 math was covered. On the first day, a test was given on a collection of math problems from the easy stuff to the more advance stuff. It give the summer school math teacher, a gauge where his students landed and the deficits of his students. We never saw the first test, and the following day changes in seating arrangements were made, to where I figure it out I was in the section of students with missing gaps of math knowledge, and it turned out to be the under-achievers, and another section of students that have never been taught. The over-achievers sitting at the back, did not move but boy did they complain about the pace of the teacher, and going over previous work the next class in the first 10 minutes, and than lead into the next lesson.
Today, it is all about dumbing it down to the point where students experience success, but not to the point where students reached their full potential. Now tell me how does that work in the Ontario’s Credit-recovery program – “Where possible, the student should be allowed to repeat only the material relating to the overall curricular expectations not achieved.” I can’t see any students of the low and under-achievers ever reaching their full potential, but I can predict they all be in need of remediation and upgrading after grade 12 graduation.
It was this story that prompted the Ontario Minister of Education (at the time Kathleen Wynne) to impose the scarlet “P” on all private school grade transcripts, including highly respected schools such as Upper Canada College. This incensed reputable, established private elementary & high schools in the province with good reason.
Very interesting topic, especially when placed alongside this week’s piece by Louise Brown in the Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/education/article/1231204–summer-widens-rich-poor-learning-gap) about the “learning loss” that takes place for some students during summer months.
I have noticed similar trends in my own school district, although I will admit to not having the data to back it up.
The amount of time, money and personnel being poured into getting students through school and back to school is tremendous. Some of this is politics–a desire by governments to live up to promises of higher achievement and higher graduation rates. But I think that some of it also reflects a desire by school districts to “get it right” for students.
I have so many questions spinning around in my mind; I will just present a couple of them.
First, from where does the pressure to “reach forward come? My sense is that, in most cases, it doesn’t originate from the student.
Second, why has the focus shifted–even at elementary–to offering summer programs mainly in English and Math. In my earlier days of teaching, I used to offer summer arts “camps” for students; others offered science exploration experiences.
Now everything seems to be focused on higher achievement in a couple of discrete areas.
Going to do some more thinking on this, but I thought that I would start with those two ideas!
I think it`s very easy to answer Stephen,we used to have curricula that worked and taught students basic incremental math skills and most students were being taught to read and spell and write(not just comprehend),decoding inaccuracy and memorized spelling lead to frustration and failure. The schools push the students along so the parents use the summers to try to gain on these deficiencies knowing full well that going into grade 5 with grade 2 reading skills and no ability to multiply will have eventual catastrophic circumstances.
It is in grade 9 that our students crash and burn,after all in elementary school there isn`t even on exam.Ask the parents from India how absolutely perplexed and disappointed they are about that one.
We need to do better and we need to stop,think and research before embracing trends that fail millions of students-after all the publishers come out with new materials and the Ministry buys in-Stop,think,research,analyze data-all that should come before a national fad is adopted.
Common sense is missing,not to speak of integrity!
Joanne,
A couple of points. First Paul is not only talking about kids that are crashing and burning because they can’t read. I think that one of the questions that he is presenting (and the one that I was addressing) has to do with kids that are reaching forward.
Second, there was a time in our history where students were taught to read and write, but very little attention was paid to comprehension and understanding. Like so many have said before, there was never really a “golden age” of public education.
Finally, common sense can never really be that far away; else could you call it “common”.
As for integrity, well, I don’t know how you measure that.
I cannot see attending summer school originating from the students in 2012, compared to the 1970s to the early 1990s. The number of courses have shrunk considerably as well as the more interesting courses that attracted students to pick up a course or two that was not being offered at their school or there was a seating cap put on the school course due to high demand. But that was back in the days of high student enrollment and by the early 1990s, the days of student enrollment was on its downward decline.
I too, was surprised to see summer programs of English and math being offered to elementary students, and I raised my eyebrows a few years ago when senior elementary students in NL, could attend summer school to upgrade their failing grades in language arts, math and other core subjects. I thought of it as being insanity for a parent to pay $150 per course, the cost of gas depending on vehicle gas mileage ranging anywhere between $60 to $120 for a round trip of 104 kilometers daily, 5 days for a 4 week period. Not too many parents takes the offer of summer school, and opt for their kids to repeat the course at the high school level. As for the senior elementary grade 7 and 8 students, my youngest child along with her peers, experienced the stress of final exams, with the attached warning – Fail the exam, go straight to summer school. As a parent, I was seriously worried if my youngest child would passed a language arts exam, because she had failed every demand written language arts test from grade 1, on material that was never seen by the students.
My youngest grade 7 final exam in language arts, she scored a 49 percent, A test for all purposes are testing the ability of students in their reading and writing skills and not their knowledge. How can any students with weaker skills in reading and writing, pass a test that virtually had no material that covered the novels and other work done in the school year? A few students, in my child’s grade 7 class went to summer school, when their final grade average was below 50 percent.
At the end of the Star article, ” Background knowledge is what helps us understand stories we read, but if your background knowledge is different than what comes up on Ontario tests or curriculum, you won’t understand” Parr noted.” http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/education/article/1231204–summer-widens-rich-poor-learning-gap
My retort to background knowledge to the school and the school board staff on background knowledge as the explanation from the education officials as to why my child consistently failed demand written LA tests was along the lines of this phrase, “Background knowledge is worthless, if the student has weak skills in reading and writing”. To be frank, if my youngest child did not have a personal bank of background knowledge, she would have failed a grade or two, or at the very least be socially promoted from one grade to the next. So my question is why isn’t background knowledge especially for the city students are not being taught the facts on ponds, lakes and other water bodies. To used a student who originally hailed from Afghanistan as an example, “One student from Afghanistan asked me if the splash pad at the park was the lake,” she said, “so I turned her around and showed her what a real lake looks like”, amounts to creating summer school sessions for students that are at risk in reading and writing,, sessions of limping students from one grade to the next.
“Second, why has the focus shifted–even at elementary–to offering summer programs mainly in English and Math. In my earlier days of teaching, I used to offer summer arts “camps” for students; others offered science exploration experiences.” As a parent, my experiences have been with my own kids, especially for my youngest, that summer programs that offered high interest programs such as an arts program at a low cost, was a big motivator factor, for my kids to expand their knowledge further by reading. For my youngest, attending the local library summer program, where her detective skills or her deep knowledge on myths and legends or in observation skills, actually kept her motivated to improve her reading skills. For once she ran down to the library, enjoying the program even though the majority of the kids were excellent readers but she was the one that became the leader in sorting out the mysteries and accomplishing the goals. One year, it was all about dragons, and my child managed to hook me in trying to figure out where Drago the dragon is. It began in my household that summer, a small collection of dragon lore books and other interesting books on dragons.
Why the focus on English and Math in the summer sessions? Perhaps the question should be, why is it necessary, when summer sessions especially for the elementary students, should be all about high interest that will motivate and nurture students to read and do math? I can well imagine the outcomes for my child, if force to go to summer school for English and Math, Lucky for her, she had a parent who began the hard work and sometimes tedious work of bringing her foundation skills in reading, writing and numeracy up to par, and why I truly appreciate the skills and knowledge set of classroom teachers. And yet the front-line teachers continued to ignored the outcomes of students who have the weaker set of skills in reading, writing and numeracy, and jumped on the bandwagons of the upper levels that speaks of motivation, background knowledge, deficits of parents that amounts to labeling parents according to social-economic status, and than the kids are educated according to their SEC status. When I was young, as well as for my oldest child, and well before SEC status became part of the edubabble focus, all children were taught the foundation skills necessary to advance from one grade to the next. As I duly noted, with my oldest who is now 38, there was no grammar or spelling and the math curriculum was just beginning the path of ‘fuzzy’ math, where basics were spurn, in favour of being creative. A good thing, that I did force my oldest to memorized her math facts, taught her grammar and the tricks of the trade in spelling, or otherwise she would have hit the wall in grade 10 math and English. It was then she started to appreciate what I did for her, even though she thought I was the meanest ogre of a mother for doing so when she was younger.
Stephen writes – “Now everything seems to be focused on higher achievement in a couple of discrete areas.”
All based on the social-economic status of students, and where all students are measured on the values of the high SES status students. In the Star article, ““It’s also the daily conversations that are sophisticated and expand children’s vocabularies, and being read to regularly by seasoned readers, one-on-one,” he said in his latest report, to be published in Canadian Public Policy. “This informal role-modeling is available to affluent children seven days per week. Less advantaged children, in contrast, have less constant exposure to those quality resources.” Or this quote, “A child who is reading four to five months behind his richer classmates in Grade 1 can fall more than a whole year behind by Grade 3, the study showed. U.S. studies have found summer learning gaps can be early warnings for poor high school marks and even dropping out.”
Had the experience with my youngest child in the many attempts of seeking SE services in reading and writing. One denial after another, and always the subtle undercurrents of SEC status as one of the reasons cited for the early learning struggles experienced by my child. Worst yet, urged often by the school, that if only my child started to act and behave more like the top achievers in the class. Hard to do, when the foundation skills of reading and writing skills are weak, and no amount of imitating the behaviour of top achievers will correct the weaknesses in reading and writing. As for the top achievers in a grade 1 class, or for that matter, the largest percentage of children do come from the higher income groups where parents are of the professional class. I also noted in grade one, and being from a small community I had the advantage of observation on a mini-scale. The top achievers of my child’s grade one class, composed of 12 students, all having parents from the professional classes, and business owners. Out of the 12, I observed 3 students who displayed the same type of writing struggles as my child. It was at the time, I started to connect the dots to the direct relationship, without the foundation skills in the 3 Rs, there is no steady progress and achievement of students. I started to track students on observation, and was easy to do, since only a few students had moved out of the school district in the last 11 years. The 3 students who were once part of the high achievers in grade one and for that matter up to grade 6, are no more. One in particular had to repeat grade 10, and I suspected as I did when I identified by observation in grade 1, she had the identical problems as my child did. It was eerie to see the different treatment by the school and school board for both students and set of parents. I was treated with contempt and the other parent was treated with lots of suggestions on providing tutoring, software and other home help that followed the proscribed curriculum standards. As for me, I was being berated and chided for focusing on the basics, my child’s root problems. Good thing that I did, she would have been sitting in a few basic courses as the one child of high SES status is currently sitting in.
My point is that the only difference between students and their ability to achieved and progress steadily, lies at the foundation skills of the 3 Rs, and not the SES status of students. It is a no brainer, that families of higher SES status will have the better ability to provide enriching activities at home, but what really puts fairness and evens out school achievement of lower SES students, is a solid foundation in the 3 Rs. When I was young, the kids that went to private school, and whose parents were of the professional class and wealthy business owners, were amazed and sometimes stunned to learn that it was real tough to beat a bunch of farm kids. Sooner or later, the rich kids did admit that we are their equals, because we had one thing that was common and that was a solid foundation in the 3 Rs. A solid foundation in the 3 Rs, opens up the world of knowledge to where one does not need to experience and have exposure to the enriching activities and behaviour of the higher SES students. My youngest child had the same experience,with a set of high SES status kids. who thought any kid beneath them were not of the same intelligence and abilities. Now their trade barbs and chat in the social media circles, talking about the ups and downs of being teens and school. It certainly appears today, that no student from any SES ranking, have a solid foundation of the 3 Rs to stand on, and results in learning struggles at the high school level, to where there should be no undue stress to achieved at grades that opens the future doors.
However, when 50 percent is the magical number, without the bothered of determining why students are struggling, receiving low but passing achievement, and without confirming through assessments to determine where all students and their levels in the 3 Rs currently stand, predicting student achievement becomes the easier task of the magical number of 50 percent. Resulting in the focus of having all students to reach the required 50 percent, and no more or no less. Unlike my day, starting from grade 5 I was expected to be an A student, and the reasons were based on the assessments that all kids took, on the 3 Rs – the core foundation – the essentials to be able to learn and progress in advance knowledge. By high school, I was informed by the guidance counselor and by many of a teacher what was expected based on the assessments that no amount of studying would improved the standard scores. I had no excuses, because I was an excellent reader, apparently in the top 5 percent in math ability, and the issues was to improve overall writing skills in English class to match the predicted score of the assessments to a 85 percent or higher. My two years in summer school, was more on having poor instruction in math, and upgrading my grades in science and English, to improve on spelling and writing issues at the high school level, to prevent me from having major difficulties in my senior years. At the very least, my sessions with the guidance counselor were never the issues of my ability in the 3 Rs, but that I never lived up to the predicted academic ability scores of the assessments.
Only my oldest child, had assessments and that could have been more to do going to a Catholic school, but I somehow had my doubts. In a grade 6 parent-teacher interview, I did see the assessments scores of the 3 Rs, including IQ, as the teacher explain there is no issues with learning, nor on basic reading, writing and numeracy skills, and she could be a 90 student instead of a 80 something student, if she applied herself. And than the but, that turned into something that was very pleasant to hear. The fact that my oldest daughter was from a divorced background, and the difficulties associated with children of divorced parents, you have done a wonderful job in parenting despite the difficulties. He went on to say, lower achievement is strongly associated no matter the ability of the students, with divorce and separated parents. Of course this was in the 1980s, and it was the last time that I heard such information, that was credited to my abilities in parenting. Today, parents are seen as deficits according to their SES status ranking, and not as individuals and students are seen only in terms of rising to the 50 percent mark and deemed no learning issues according to the SES status of the students.
Stephen writes in his second post, ” Second, there was a time in our history where students were taught to read and write, but very little attention was paid to comprehension and understanding. Like so many have said before, there was never really a “golden age” of public education. Finally, common sense can never really be that far away; else could you call it “common”. As for integrity, well, I don’t know how you measure that.”
I beg to differ, because comprehension and understanding was taught when I went to school, via through grammar, spelling , writing lessons, literature and more importantly the background knowledge to truly understand the stories and curriculum material, plus make sense of society outside of the school walls. Now tell me Stephen, how many students can make sense of the book Night or Animal Farm, when the students do not have the background knowledge of the political and economic systems operating within the eras of the two books? I had to end up teaching it to my youngest child, in order for her to truly understand both books. She did very well in both novel units, because she had the background knowledge of the political and economic systems, to truly connect to the messages and emotions of both books. She learned, that people in positions of power and authority are the very ones that are inclined to abuse their position, at the expense of others. Too bad, it was not on the list of expected outcomes, and not all about the emotions and experiences of people, who truly face being stamped out of existence for either displaying individualism, questioning authorities/experts and for being different than the status-quo. It was only my child that asked the question, why didn’t anyone killed Hitler and for Animal Farm, why didn’t the animals kill the pigs.
Using the reasons of never really a golden age of public education, is convenient for the opponents of the 3 Rs, when there was not the resources or the technology to collect the data streams as it is today. Common sense is lacking inside the education system, when outcomes of students are ignore from one grade to the next. All the focus is the 50 percent mark, and never the data streams that points to the root problems of students, or the other reason the higher achievement of students. based on the strengths and weaknesses of students. I had an excellent education, considering the fact that I entered grade one in 1960 without verbal speech, and by grade 5 I became an A student. But today, I would have no chance besides the offerings of a third-tier education,and dumb-down curriculum.
Where is the common sense, seeing the 40 percent of grade three students barely at reading grade level or reading below, from one year to the next? Where is the common sense, when high school mathematics have been reduced to paper and paste fraction strips, and kids counting on their fingers? Where is the common sense in the education system, that ignores the reading and learning science research that has proven without a doubt whole language and its many versions renders many students to remain low achievers throughout school? Where is the common sense, to ignore the recommendations of psycho-educational assessments concerning what is needed to upgrade and overcome core weaknesses in the 3 Rs? Where is the common sense to denied alternative accommodations based on the perceived observations of the teachers that it is a mental health issue, and not the fact that the reading assessment and other assessments have stated below average ability in reading, and requires time and alternative accommodation for decoding problems, in order to fully comprehend? The latter being the current problem for my child, the root problem has been decoding and not the comprehension of material, if given the time and alternative accommodation to achieve. No, she has a mental health issue of self-confidence, and therefore does not meet the criteria of receiving accommodations, since there is no issue with comprehension problems, as the assessments have noted. How crazy is that Stephen? It is like taking away the wheel chair away, and give the person a walker even though the person has never learned to walk! In the same way what is being asked for, my 17 year old, to take the public exams with the rest of the students and to achieve without having the time necessary to read the questions and material at her much reduced pace of reading due to poor decoding skills. And guess what, how is it common sense starting from grade one up to grade 11, for all the educators including the school board to ignore the obvious struggles that my child had in reading, writing and numeracy, including a good 40 percent of children from one year to the next, without ever questioning the instruction practices and curriculum, and provide education upgrading based on the SES factors and mental health scores?
Summer school and the offerings are just that, the offerings to have students limp from one grade to the next. And not the kind that I had in the 1970s, plus night school where there was always a number of high school students all to anxious to graduate early, to play with the big boys and girls at the university level. . . , . .
,