You are viewing the EdNews Blog archives.
These archives contain blog posts from before June 7, 2011
Click here to view the new Voices section of EdNews

Archive for the ‘Student perspective’ Category

My cousin exemplifies importance of FNE Denver reforms

Thursday, April 21st, 2011

This article was submitted by Gregory Hatcher, a 2009 graduate of the Denver School of Science and Technology, a current student at Colorado Christian University and a member of Stand for Children Colorado.

Change is hard and sometimes difficult decisions have to be made to improve outcomes for kids. Over the past few months we’ve seen how difficult change can be. In November of 2010 the Denver school board voted vote to turn around six of the lowest performing schools in the Far Northeast area, which were also among the lowest performing in the district. The vote turned out to be 4-3.

My cousin is just as smart if not smarter than me but he had a very different high school experience.

Of the four board members voting yes, one was Nate Easley. Easley is  president of the DPS board and the District 4 representative, which includes the Far Northeast area.

Most recently, a small but loud group of folks tried to recall Easley for many alleged transgressions, one of being his recent vote on the FNE turnaround plan. With only 6 percent of students graduating from Montbello high school ready for college in a district with a whopping remediation rate of 55 percent, I don’t understand the attacks on Easley for taking a strong position to address this dire situation.

There need to be people rallying around the fact that thousands of families choice out of the Far Northeast area because the schools in their neighborhood aren’t meeting the basic standards for their students. When looking at the graphs that the Colorado SchoolView website offers, you will see that too many schools in the Far Northeast are failing to grow and achieve around math, reading, and writing standards.

I want to take this opportunity to encourage all decision-makers in charge of the implementation and turnaround in the Far Northeast to remember that too many students have failed and are failing in the current system. All families and students in the Far Northeast deserve and need better options. They need schools that are preparing them for college and life. They don’t need schools that fail students and leave them to a future of poverty or prison.

It’s troubling to me that the criminal justice system plans for jail and prison expansion based on 3rd and 4th grade reading levels. I ask that the adults making decisions within DPS and the community work to flip this percentage. It would be amazing to hear that the criminal justice system is using 3rd and 4th grade reading levels to determine how much to reduce jail or prison capacity in Colorado.

I’m a 2009 graduate of the Denver School of Science and Technology. I currently attend Colorado Christian University where I’m studying education, and I work with Stand for Children Colorado which is an organization focused on making public education better for all kids in Denver and Colorado. During my recent testimony in front of the DPS school board I told a personal story about the differences between the education I received at DSST and what my cousin received at Montbello High School.

My cousin is just as smart if not smarter than me but he had a very different high school experience. He was a lead on the drum line at Montbello and he can point to core classes, even math, where he was pushed on just because he could play a drum, and he wasn’t the only one that was passed along without learning what he needed to learn. So what happened when my cousin went to college?

He attends Metro State, but not on the “traditional” track.  His first year at Metro he felt that he was constantly going backwards trying to catch up to the rest of his peers because Montbello did not prepare him. Consider the amount of money he and his family have had to pay for remedial courses. Consider the emotional struggles he had – so much so that he had to take time off. I ask you, how many smart students like him are dropping out of college. How many students like him are we pushing on the track to either poverty or prison?

I believe every student should have a fair chance of succeeding in college and life. Schools that produce results like DSST regardless of whether they’re a charter, traditional, or alternative should not be an exception, they should be the rule. I ask you, as adults reading this article today, what are you going to do to ensure students like my cousin have an opportunity to receive a quality education? There are too many students failing in the Far Northeast, and it’s not fair, it is an injustice.

I believe that if the families and communities come together around the changes in the Far Northeast then they can and will be successful. As adults we have to remember to keep kids at the center of our conversation because ultimately it’s their future.

I’ve chosen to work at Stand for Children and go to school to ultimately make public education better for all kids. Time is not on our side. When you see and hear that 94 percent of students graduating from Montbello High School are in need of remedial courses when entering college it should spark a fire in you and challenge you to work towards turning failing schools around.

Please keep in mind that I was one of the lucky students to get into DSST, but I always remember that none of my friends who applied had their numbers called. Thinking of those friends, my cousin, and the hundreds of other stories like these keeps me motivated to continue the work to create better high quality schools for all students.

Change is hard and sometimes very difficult decisions have to be made in order to improve outcomes for kids.

Popularity: 19% [?]

Posted in featured, Reform, Student perspective | 3 Comments »

From the publisher: Fight the pressure

Tuesday, December 7th, 2010

I just finished watching a new film called “Race to Nowhere.” On one level it is yet another documentary about an education system that has run off the rails. But this one differs from “Waiting for Superman,” “The Lottery” and “The Cartel” – the reform triumvirate – in some important ways.

Although “Race to Nowhere” has been framed by some as the anti-“Superman,” it is in fact such a thematically distinct movie that such comparisons are meaningless. Sure, the 90-minute film takes brief swipes at No Child Left Behind and a testing-obsessed culture that sucks joy out of learning and renders schooling all but meaningless. It advocates for pumping more money into public education, barely mentions charter schools and leaves teachers’ unions completely out of the discussion.

But unlike the other three films, “Race to Nowhere” isn’t about how the education system is failing low-income kids. It’s about how as a society we have put so much pressure on our children – especially middle- and upper-income high-achievers – that we are driving them to despair and even suicide in pursuit of our dreams for them, which are little more than shallow fantasies.

In other words, to the extent that we view our children as extensions of our own egos, we are doing them tremendous harm.

The film is co-directed by Vicki Abeles and Jessica Congdon and produced by Abeles. Though not in wide release, it is being screened in conjunction with “community conversations” at various sites around the country. You can see it at the Boulder theater tonight at 7 p.m. or in other venues across the state over the next several weeks. You can find a list of screenings here.

One needn’t choose sides here. I saw a lot to admire – and criticize – in “Waiting for Superman.” I loved “The Lottery.” I found “The Cartel” to be shallow and annoying.

“Race to Nowhere” hit me in a different place and on a different level. The first thing I did after watching the film – which a publicist sent me on DVD – was walk into my daughter Marian’s room and give her a hug.

She’s 21 and left her private, East Coast liberal arts college last year, half-way through her junior year. In some ways she is a lot like the kids depicted in the film.

This film will be tough for a lot of my peers to watch because it hits so close to home. None of us wants to be like the parents in the film. Many of them struck me as suburban automatons, who, driven by internal and external forces they couldn’t control, pressured and over-scheduled their kids with lessons and teams and tutoring sessions, mostly because that’s what everyone else was doing. The ultimate in keeping up with the Joneses. Heaven forbid a child should have unstructured, worry-free time.

Because she is indirectly a subject of the film, I asked Marian to watch “Race to Nowhere” and give me a review. She made it through about half of it before she decided she got the gist. Here is some of what she had to say about the movie and its message.

“What struck me was how parents are overly anxious and the degree to which they are overly involved in their children’s lives. The pressure within the school system was actually created by parents and now it has spread.

“The movie seemed very accurate in showing the pressure. But the kids also seemed like fairly weak individuals because they weren’t doing jack to stand up to it. It’s ironic. These kids probably won’t succeed in the end if they’re letting their parents and teachers boss them around that much.

“Working really hard and doing everything right only gets you to middle management. If you say screw everyone and do things your own way you’re going to be happier and in a lot of cases you are going to be successful, if you’re smart. The whole cookie-cutter thing just fills in the gaps around the people who really matter in society.” (Interestingly, the movie in its final minutes, which Marian didn’t watch, makes almost this exact point. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and other legendary entrepreneurs never finished college, and most CEOs were C students, the movie says).

What advice would she give to a 14- or 15-year old feeling squeezed in the pressure vice?

“Drink a lot of caffeine, get at least six hours of sleep a night, tell your parents to back off when they’re being jerks, and if your homework seems really stupid don’t do it and read a book instead.”

My sense is that the creators of “Race to Nowhere” would agree with every word of that advice, minus the caffeine. I’m not sure I agree to the same extent. But what do I know?

Popularity: 5% [?]

Posted in From the editor, Student perspective | 16 Comments »

The nightly grind

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010

Editor’s note: Brendan Craine is a junior at the Denver School of the Arts.

In my dissection of the sorer points of Colorado education, I have tried to save the best for last. Naturally, as a student, this is my greatest woe.

Let’s be fair here – this post almost writes itself. The universal student opinion towards homework is far from secret. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that every person who reads this has, at some point, expressed dislike towards homework, even if it happened a while ago.

Before I begin bringing up any points, or dissecting anything, consider that. Homework is almost universally disliked. Mentioning it to a student (especially a high school student) is an invitation for grumbling and irritation. So why, then, do we have it at all?

I am not going to spend any time debating homework as an idea. I think that our school system is far too heavily based on a platform of grading, budgets, and statistics, and I am all too aware that removing homework is not only drastic, but probably also impossible without a complete revamping of the system. I may not like it, but I’m not going to waste any time yelling about it.

I will also not talk about homework amounts. Whether or not six hours of homework is too much is an entirely different debate. It’s assumed that third graders will do less work than high school sophomores, and that’s really the way it should be. As we advance on to more complicated subjects, it’s natural that they would require more work.

Finally, I readily admit that, as a student who has to deal with homework on a nightly basis, my opinions are far from neutral. I have no way to balance that, aside from plain open-mindedness. Hopefully, my points will still be valid.

So, if I’m going to pick apart homework, I’m going to need a working definition. So, what is homework?

It’s practice, and that’s it.

Whether you’re reading and re-reading a history text to memorize dates and figures of the French Revolution, moving equations from factored to standard form, or just repeating the same letter in cursive over and over, all you are doing is practicing. Nothing new is learned through the activity of repeating a task, aside from being able to do it more quickly and more naturally.

This is even the case with history, since while individual dates and events may change, the process of learning about and understanding history remains static. In fact, history tends to repeat itself often enough that it could be argued that the individual dates and events are irrelevant.

So, based on that, there is one problem I see with homework right off the bat: We are graded on it.

Why is that a problem? Well, homework is intended to be practice. I have no problem with the idea of working to become better at something – I already do it without prompting – but to grade on the practice doesn’t seem logical.

For instance, are Olympic athletes given scores based on how much they prepared for the event? No. And yet, that’s what homework has become, because our system demands frequent grade updates, and therefore, frequent assignments.

So, the first thing to change about homework:

Stop grading on homework. Yes, even if it’s just a completion grade. Completion grades make absolutely no sense, even in the current system. We have a 0%-100% grading scale, and a completion grade can only be one extreme or the other.

Students, however, don’t learn in absolutes. To grade me on whether or not I turned in a piece of paper with some writing on it immediately puts me on par with every single other person who did the same, even if they all got the questions correct, and I did not. The grade isn’t based on learning or understanding, and it doesn’t make sense. To continue the simile, it’s like giving every athlete a gold medal just for competing.

The natural argument here is that, once the grading is removed, so will be the incentive to do any work, since a student who did no homework and one who did all of it will receive the same grade for it – no grade at all. The only difference, of course, is that the second student will have a much more concrete understanding of the material, and is likely to do much better on any quizzes, which is why my next point is…

Replace the lost homework grades with quizzes and tests. Students take quizzes and tests very seriously. This is because with homework, the mindset is one of “students vs. teacher”, (“Ms. So-and-so gave us so much lit homework to do! Ugh!”) which tends to foster dislike and hostility towards the teacher.

This is opposed to quizzes, which have the mindset of “student vs. all the other students,” a much more productive environment, especially among teenagers, who enjoy feeling like victims. Suddenly, the teacher becomes more like an overseer, spurring the students to compete against each other. Plus, quizzes can be immensely diverse in their grading – almost as diverse as students.

The main benefit here is that a student has the freedom to regulate his or her own workload. Instead of being forced to stay up studying until 12:30 each night, I have the option to go to bed, (and be more awake and able to learn the next day), without it affecting my class grades. Because I want to do well on any quizzes, I will study as much as I can – but also as much as I feel I should.

The only person who really knows when they’ve mastered a set of dates, a mathematic method, or the themes of a novel is the person who is mastering them. This prevents more intelligent students from being stuck with what is essentially “busy work.” If they have mastered the coursework, then they can stop studying. A greater amount of control would also mean a higher level of maturity and structure in students, since it would be necessary, but not required, to organize one’s time. Making something like that a requirement makes it hard to obey, but students will make good choices on their own.

Finally, the most important point:

Homework should never be a substitute for teaching. This is very important, because there really is no substitute for good teaching. I have been in several classes where the teacher does nothing more than review the homework. That really is no good, especially in the fast-paced curriculum that most high schools have. Ideally, I’d be given an opportunity to try something, and then have it explained, and then be able to try again with my new knowledge.

Right now, only steps one and two in that process are taking place, and there isn’t time for a step three. I am aware that this is partially because of the poor student/teacher ratio, with as many as thirty-five or forty students in a single class. That’s something that needs working on, too, but not in this post.

The one problem with what I’m suggesting is that what is being taught in the classroom needs to parallel the studying that the students are doing. This would especially be an issue in a history class, since the teaching tends to be very sequential. However, if period in history were broken up into very small chunks and taught a week or three days at a time, then the students could study that chunk for any amount of time during the period when it was being taught, then take the test on it, then repeat.

Overall, the most important thing is to focus on the fact that school is meant to be about learning. As soon as learning is sacrificed for grades, structure, or just “getting through the year”, then changes need to be made.

A successful school system puts control in the hands of the students, and puts them in a position to make good decisions, or suffer the consequences of making bad decisions. The more the educational system is based around forcing students to be responsible, the more they will resist, and this is especially true with homework.

Anyway, I better call this a wrap, because I need to get on this math assignment…

Popularity: 4% [?]

Posted in Newsletter guest article, Student perspective | 22 Comments »

In R2T, student voice will sharpen blunt instruments

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

Editor’s note: The following piece was written by Brian Barhaugh and Cristian Mendoza Espinosa. Barhaugh is executive director of Project VOYCE. Mendoza Espinoza is a junior at Denver’s George Washington High School and a member of Project VOYCE.

There’s a missing link in our efforts to use achievement data to drive school reform.  From Colorado’s extensive Race to the Top (R2T) planning efforts to national school performance standards, the focus on achievement results keeps relying on blunt instruments.

Achievement data tells us where we are, but misses the essential question of how we got there or, more importantly, how to improve.

We will continue relying on blunt instruments if we don’t bring student voice into the game.

A recent case in point is the Bruce Randolph School teacher who, in one semester, went from being considered by students as one of their worst teachers to being named by those same students as the school’s first Teacher of the Month.  When asked why she thought she received the award, she described her new class structure.  When the students were asked how this teacher went from worst to best, they weren’t aware of a new class structure.  They said she did it by constantly requesting and using their feedback. Now she’s even more excited about working with her students.

The basic business practice of asking your customers for feedback to improve your product is tragically lacking in America’s most vital industry — education.  Colorado has a rare opportunity to take a leadership role in breaking out of this rut in Race to the Top (R2T).  But the forces pulling us back into the old familiar tracks are persistent.

Eighteen students from 14 different metro-area high schools have been deeply engaged with the state’s R2T Work Groups. They were hired and trained by Project VOYCE (Voices of Youth Changing Education) over the summer to find ways to make a difference in education in their schools and in Colorado.  While their contributions were widely praised by the lieutenant governor and numerous R2T co-chairs, and photos of their involvement in R2T were featured in the New York Times and Education Week, the recently released summary of Colorado’s proposal has them concerned.

As Cristian Mendoza Espinosa (a George Washington High School Junior) recently wrote of his R2T experience, “At every meeting I attended, I felt welcome. Everyone listened to my ideas and appreciated my comments… That said, I was confused when I did not see any explicit mention of student voice in The Race to the Top proposal.”

An education official from the governor’s office has responded that while student voice was not mentioned in the recently released proposal summary, “We, too, are committed to student engagement.  When we are ready to share the details of the proposal, you will see that this commitment will stay strong throughout the implementation of Race to the Top.”

This statement is encouraging.  At the same time we know that educators with the best of intentions often miss a crucial distinction between student engagement and student voice. As Cristian wrote, “The educational system has been working for (as opposed to with) students, like myself, for too long…I learn a lot more in classes where teachers work with me; they ask for my input, and actually apply it, making material easier to learn.”

Lt. Governor Barbara O’Brien has been supportive of student voice in R2T since the first meeting in April.  Last week O’Brien was named one of the top 10 education reformers to watch nationally for “leading the most extensive Race to the Top outreach effort in the country.”  What better way to offer proof that O’Brien’s outreach efforts truly went beyond the usual circles than by highlighting how student voice is being used in Colorado to sharpen the tools that are needed to improve student achievement?

Tapping the full power of student voice in Colorado’s R2T proposal involves these key elements:

Standards and Assessments – Make them relevant to students’ lives.

  • Involve students in standards support, formative assessment development and interim benchmark development.

Data – Go beyond student engagement data (attendance, etc.) to real student voice.

  • Utilize student-led outreach to capture feedback from disengaged students.
  • Disseminate data on impact of student voice best practices statewide.

Great Teachers and Leaders – Put students in the center of the learning community

  • Go beyond formative assessments to “Fast, Frequent Feedback” systems to accelerate improvements in teacher effectiveness.
  • Develop a state-wide internet-based student voice network to share best practices in student voice and student/teacher  partnerships.
  • Build student/teacher partnership training into professional development and pre-service training.
  • Include students in teacher/leader recruitment and hiring.

Support Struggling Schools – As Arne Duncan said, “The students know what’s working and not working in schools before anyone else.

  • Identify best practices to utilize student feedback to determine school strengths and weaknesses and to select best intervention/turnaround strategies.
  • Provide training to build school leadership culture based on student/adult partnerships.

O’Brien and Work Group Co-chairs Monte Moses and Jesus Salazar have clearly stated the importance of student-centered strategies in R2T.   If we are to meet Arne Duncan’s challenge to go beyond incremental systems change to continuous improvement and innovation, then  let’s be bold and not just include these strategies, but shine a light on them.

As Cristian said in his recent letter, “… by working with their students, teachers become better connected to their students and do their best to help their students succeed.”

Popularity: 4% [?]

Posted in Newsletter guest article, Student perspective | 4 Comments »

Choose one of the following

Monday, December 14th, 2009

Editor’s note: Brendan Craine is a junior at the Denver School of the Arts, where his focus is creative writing.

So, I recently got my PSAT scores back. As is to be expected, this has gotten me thinking a lot about standardized tests.

In my history, standardized tests have always been a frustrating experience, despite the fact that I generally do quite well on them. I am not entirely sure why I am irked, but If I had to guess, I’d say that something about the idea of ranking each and every student in DPS gets under my skin – it just seems so Orwellian.

Also, I’ve always been against the idea of turning large groups of people into numbers. Do our tests say anything about us, other than our basic level of academic competency? More importantly, is that what DPS and the National Merit Scholars consider important?

I understand the purpose that standardized tests serve, and I have been unable to come up with another way to accomplish what they do, but I can’t shake the feeling that something about them needs to be changed. I can remember that ever since I first took them in third grade, (third grade?) I have hated them, even if it was just on principle, before I was able to really break down their problems.

The analysis and evaluation of the effectiveness of standardized testing is extensive, and so I will not be touching on very much of it here, save for one major point: Standardized testing is standardized. People, however, are not. This is sort of a no-brainer at first. After all, the point of standardized testing is that people will get different scores on the same test. That’s the point of any test, in fact. The only difference is that while individual teachers can craft their tests to fit their curriculum, students, timeframe, and so on, standardized tests are entirely standardized. Everyone takes them at the same time, and they all take the same test.

The idea of making the test uniform for every student is so that you can put all test-takers on an even footing. If all the students take test A on Wednesday morning for a period of 3 hours, and they all receive the same questions, then we will be able to clearly see which students are being taught with the best method, right? Well, this idea ignores several factors that contribute to the test that cannot be standardized. Economic standing, previous education, and other social factors. If my dog, Scruffypaws, dies the night before the test, you can bet that I will not perform as well as the kid next to me, Tommy Wilkshaw, who spent that time studying.

Additionally, once tests become standardized, they have to be dumbed down in the process. The majority of CSAP questions are multiple choice, and the entirety of the PSATs are multiple choice, as well. It takes far less thinking to fill in one of four bubbles than it does to write an essay. There is a chance, if small, that someone filling in bubbles completely at random can receive a good or perfect score.

And the most disgusting part of this is that the PSATs score based on writing ability! How can you gauge someone’s writing ability without actually having them write anything? True, it takes far more time and money to grade essays, but enough of both has already been spent on formulating, creating, distributing and collecting the tests. Surely the grading is worth a little of that, as well?

My opinions on this are not mine alone. This article by writer and critic of the educational system Alfie Kohn outlines a number of major problems created by standardized testing, and this article in the New York Times adds to some of his arguments.

Still, I said that the purpose of this article was not to criticize, and that is true, so I will stop myself before I get carried away. My main concern is: is there another way to fulfill the purpose of the standardize test, but also remedy some of these issues? I openly admit that my understanding of the construction and use of standardized testing is lacking. Because of this, any alternative that I suggest has the possibility of missing some key point, and being completely worthless.

However, breaking down what I perceive to be the purposes of the standardized test, they are as follows:

-Gives a convenient basis for district budget distribution

-Helps the tracking of different curriculums, methods, etc, and their “success”

-Makes it easier for colleges to scout for more desirable students

-Makes it possible to rank Colorado against the rest of the country

So, what if we used a system of student-driven tests?

For example, a “writing” question from a current standardized test might look like “Read the sentence below and circle which alternate composition, if any, would be more correct” followed by a poorly constructed sentence, and three alternatives, one of which is correct under the rules of grammar.

Compare that to this question: “Write out four sentences that use the same subject, verb, and themes, but that are progressively more correct in composition.” Rather than having the student pick from one of four answers for the “right” one, you are having them undergo the exact same thought process of “what is wrong with each of these four sentences, if anything?” But they must be able to identify each individual grammatical mistake on their own, without any assistance.

Following this idea, math questions would be largely proofs and student-constructed story problems, rather than multiple-choice problems with one specific numerical answer. In mathematics, an understanding of ideas is far more valuable than an ability to follow steps. One is based in knowledge of mathematics, while the other is based in imitation of the teacher’s given method.

A student who can explain why it is acceptable to cross-multiply two equal fractions with differing denominators has learned far more than one who simply knows that it is acceptable. This is especially true when dealing with higher math. If all I know how to do is duplicate the results and methods of mathematicians before me, then how much of an understanding of math can I really have?

Finally, reading would be nothing more than a passage of text, followed by space for a response. The current system involves asking the student several questions about theme, metaphor, and major literary devices, and while it is good to be able to recognize these things, it is a skill that is far more valuable in writing than in reading. (For instance, a possible writing question: “Write a short piece that makes use of metaphor.”)

Reading questions shouldn’t assume that there is a “right” answer to any of the questions asked. If a question asks if Old Farmer Brown’s broken left leg was an allegory for the economic crippling of the U.S. during the Great Depression, then suddenly I am forced to treat my own opinions of the text as if they could be wrong, rather than just personal interpretation. If it is widely accepted that Farmer Brown’s leg does represent the great depression, but I didn’t think it did, then I am wrong.

However, if I were given a space in which to respond, then I have the option of bringing up that I thought that Farmer Brown’s leg was a metaphor for his outdated view of the world, which was holding him back. This answer shows thoughtful analysis, but lets me identify and express my own interpretations of the text, rather than having someone else’s forced upon me. Isn’t that a far more ideal goal?

Using this test would take more time and money to grade, but would be much easier to write, since the answers would be generated by the students, rather than the test designers. It would be extremely important for the test to be graded thoughtfully, rather than from the mindset that there is a “correct” answer for every question.

The results of these tests would reveal much, much more about each individual student, since the tests show that I write with blunt, nonflowery sentence composition, a preference for mathematical proofs that are simple and effective, but leave out some deeper elements, and have a tendency towards applying political and historical themes to writing, rather than emotional ones.

All of this dwarfs the information that a current standardized test might give. Namely, that I answered “B” on reading question 6, “11.61” on math question 13, and “D” for writing question 20, that I rounded only to the hundredth place, and that the correct answer to writing question 20 was “C”, and so I was wrong.

Colleges would have so much more information to use for scouting out students. The effectiveness of a teaching curriculum would be clear, since unless each student has a full understanding of the source material, they will not be able to fully explain it.

Likewise, the ranking of Colorado against the U.S., and the distribution of the budget would be essentially the same as now, but based on a much wider scope of information.

I realize that this post is nearing the 1,500-word mark, and so I won’t keep ranting, but just consider this: Students are smart. They are smart enough to understand things and make connections and express themselves without getting suggestions on how to do it.

If the goal of the educational system is to produce a generation of free, intelligent thinkers, then let’s stop testing them on whether or not they can fill in one of four bubbles.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Posted in Student perspective, Testing | 14 Comments »

Of carrots and sticks

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Editor’s note: Brendan Craine is a junior at Denver School of the Arts, where his focus is creative writing.

It recently occurred to me that I’ve spent an unsettlingly large amount of time wondering what I am going to do with my life.

We all know what it is at some point in our lives, whether you had a clear-cut plan from day one, or if you started at second grade with “Dinosaur-Robot-Time-Traveler.” The problem is that while a student may know exactly what it is he or she wants to do, knowing how to accomplish that goal is not something taught in schools. We are all given essentially the same fundamental academic base, with very little individual tailoring until mid-high school.

I’m not suggesting that this is somehow wrong – I think that a community with a common set of knowledge is important for maintaining that community. After all, if everyone had only their set of skills, with no overlap, it would be much harder for us to relate to each other.

However, if your sights are set on becoming a pilot for the Air Force, then it would be hard for you to understand why you must endure something like Applied Chemistry to be able to achieve your dream. And honestly, there isn’t much of a reason, aside from the fact that you will need to complete high school to become a pilot, and Applied Chem. is one of the required courses. Given that, it’s understandable why some students might not feel especially motivated to excel in courses that have no correlation to what they want.

This FAQ section from the University of Oregon suggests that encouraging a student and drawing connections between what they are learning and their own life is a good way to interest them in the source material. But what if there isn’t actually any kind of connection, or the student lacks interest in the part of his or her life that the course relates to? Even if someone explains that it is important to study literature to gain a better appreciation for various cultures and viewpoints on life how does that motivate a student who is really only interested in engineering?

In college, a certain amount of freedom is available. You can take classes that relate to what you are interested in learning, and if the class turns out to be focused on something that you don’t want to focus on, you can drop it. Although not exactly encouraged, dropping classes in college is by no means a frowned upon activity.

In fact, the majority of colleges have specific procedures for dropping classes.

This same amount of choice does not exist on the high school level. Dropping classes is possible, but graduation requirements (and I am specifically referring to those of DPS) make it very difficult to do while still retaining enough credits to graduate. This comes as a frustration for me, since there have been a number of classes during my academic career that I would have loved to drop and replace with courses that I am actually interested in.

So why don’t we allow students to personalize their educations in this way?

Well for one, we like to keep a standardized system. In the same way that we have CSAPs and the SAT and ACTs, we like to be able to look at a large pool of student grade data while maintaining a constant frame of reference. If a class of 300 freshmen take political science, and they all get grades, then we immediately know which freshman did best in that course.

Compare that to a class of 300 freshman, 50 of whom take  political science, while the other 250 drop it for painting, Algebra 2, Music Theory, Chemistry 2, Psych 1, or Intro to European Literature. Who’s to say who the best student was, from that group? The courses just aren’t comparable, and that makes analyzing them very difficult.

So, some might argue,why not just put all the freshman in the same classes? After all, isn’t political science relevant in this day and age? An understanding of government and politics is a basic building block for someone living in the U.S., and anyone should be able to find interest in it. …Unless that person plans to move to a different country, or remain uninvolved in the democratic system, or just doesn’t like to watch the news, or just simply isn’t interested.

I can appreciate how necessary it is to maintain a public knowledge base. We have to be able to relate to each other somehow, after all. Would it not be better, though, if that common ground came from a shared living experience, rather than knowledge of certain subjects?

And wouldn’t students who are given more freedom to choose their own life paths focus better on subjects that they want to be learning about? My best grades have always been in the classes that interest me, and I don’t know anyone with whom that is not the case.

I am not suggesting a dramatic revamping of the educational system, or even any kind of change at all. I am merely commenting on the effectiveness of student motivation. Any person can motivate himself or herself, and with a system that makes it easier to create one’s preferred educational menu, students could be actively engaged in their own education, rather than have someone else manage it for them, and then act disappointed when the students are less than enthusiastic.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Posted in Student perspective | 1 Comment »

Doze were the days

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009

Editor’s note: Brendan Craine is a junior at Denver School of the Arts, where his focus is creative writing.

A study conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services determined that the average “adolescent” (young adult from ages 12-18) required at least 8.5 to 9.5 hours of sleep every single night for ideal health and brain development. This is a result that makes me kind of chuckle and sob at the same time, because I haven’t gotten more than seven hours of sleep for the past five nights, and I consider myself to be among the more rested of my peers.

In fact, a quick poll of the room (currently filled with a slew of writers, aged 13-17) revealed that of the entire 17 of them, only four had gotten at least 8.5 hours of sleep in the last week, and of those four, only one had gotten enough sleep on more than one night.

A lot of focus has been put on academic achievement through the availability of additional resources to students, smaller classes, higher standards, and so forth. However, the most basic of issues has yet to be resolved: sleep. No matter how many resources a student body has, it will not be able to use them effectively if the student body can barely keep its head off its desk.

Although some schools are making efforts to extend the amount of time a student will have available for sleep – my own school, for instance, is pushing the time at which it starts forward one hour – there is still far less priority given to sleep than there should be.

Most students complete around four hours of homework each night, which seems minimal when taken out of context. After all, if each students get out of school at three, then they should be done working at seven, right? Well, that is not taking into account transit from school to home, dinner, any work that the students might have (and high schoolers do hold jobs), as well as the fact that it is darn hard to focus after being at school for eight hours.

Assuming, however, that students don’t eat dinner, and go to bed immediately after finishing their work, then they will sleep from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m., which is 11 hours of sleep, and fully adequate. Still, who would want their kid to live like that? Seventy-seven hour work weeks, without dinner?

What about the fun part of being a kid, namely, goofing off and being able to appreciate life as an adult without the responsibilities of being one!

I’m all for additional resources for schools, and greater funding and extra extra-curricular activities, but let’s have those things when we can properly enjoy them and use them to their fullest potential: Once we’ve had a good night’s sleep.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Posted in Student perspective | 13 Comments »

Colorado Health Foundation Walton Family Foundation Daniels fund Pitton Foundations Donnell-Kay Foundation