Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/home-schooling/
Detailed Reaction:
Home schooling is something that I didn't know much about before reading this article. I used to think that nepotism and cheating was the basis for home-schooled students to pass and get high scores on standardized achievement tests. I still have a firm belief in the fact that home-schooled students still have an unfair advantage over traditional school students. There has to be a reason as to why this type of students are academically achieving while regular students aren't.
The statistics actually show that most of the home-school students are from Caucasian middle-class Christian families. You'd expect the students to be socioeconomically disadvantaged. But the reason these families chose to home-school their children is because of the "poor learning environment" traditional schools have to offer nowadays. I agree that traditional schools aren't providing as much as a "parent-teacher" can. In my opinion, One-on-one teaching is superior to teaching a group of students. But still, parent-teachers can be the same people administering tests and you never know if they help their children to cheat or not. I, for one, would definitely help my child get scores that are in the top percentiles, so that he or she may get into a university of good stature. That's very much like nepotism, but only in this case, it's based on educational "hookups".
Also, regulations aren't really set in stone for this type of education. That means students aren't entitled to follow similar rules imposed on regular students in schools. Home-schooled students obviously have more freedom than students like me. There aren't many restrictions placed on such students and their families. This just further proves my belief that these students can cheat with ease on the tests they take at home. There is little to no third-party supervision when it comes to home-schooling. Simply stated, I don't think these students would achieve the same grades in a traditional school.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Year-Round Schooling
Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/year-round-schooling/
Detailed Reaction:
To me, year-round schooling seems a tad bit annoying. I'd much rather enjoy my summer break at the beach than in a classroom. This breaks away from the traditional calender of school, and it seems a bit odd. Students are broken into "tracks", or groups, and they stay in school while others don't. While traditional school cycles follow a certain order and succession of breaks, year-round schooling's breaks are different for everyone and it is all over the place as well. I still think there are substantial benefits in this type of schooling though.
According to the article above, the academic achievements of regular students and year-round students can't even be differentiated. There are no big differences in their grades or standardized test scores when compared to one another. However, it does have benefits that concern other things. Year-round schooling has proven to save schools money when it comes to building new facilities to compensate for the abundant students in an overcrowded school. This is an advantage because the money that has now been saved can be used for the resources required to help students achieve academically.
Also, year-round schooling enables High-risk students and English-language learners to learn in a smaller-sized classroom. This allows teachers to actually be able to communicate with the students in need and pinpoint their weak points. From there, the teachers can teach and build up on the students' weaknesses. This type of betterment is not as evident in a normal-sized class. Year-round schooling should be in more overcrowded schools to save them from closing down because of failing grades and financial disadvantages.
Detailed Reaction:
To me, year-round schooling seems a tad bit annoying. I'd much rather enjoy my summer break at the beach than in a classroom. This breaks away from the traditional calender of school, and it seems a bit odd. Students are broken into "tracks", or groups, and they stay in school while others don't. While traditional school cycles follow a certain order and succession of breaks, year-round schooling's breaks are different for everyone and it is all over the place as well. I still think there are substantial benefits in this type of schooling though.
According to the article above, the academic achievements of regular students and year-round students can't even be differentiated. There are no big differences in their grades or standardized test scores when compared to one another. However, it does have benefits that concern other things. Year-round schooling has proven to save schools money when it comes to building new facilities to compensate for the abundant students in an overcrowded school. This is an advantage because the money that has now been saved can be used for the resources required to help students achieve academically.
Also, year-round schooling enables High-risk students and English-language learners to learn in a smaller-sized classroom. This allows teachers to actually be able to communicate with the students in need and pinpoint their weak points. From there, the teachers can teach and build up on the students' weaknesses. This type of betterment is not as evident in a normal-sized class. Year-round schooling should be in more overcrowded schools to save them from closing down because of failing grades and financial disadvantages.
Private Schooling
Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/private-schooling/
Detailed Reaction:
Do Private schools motivate students to academically achieve and go beyond? According to studies, yes, Private school students tend to achieve more academically and as a student when compared to public school students. I think that this statement can be proven, but it isn't exactly a fact that is set in stone. Students that go to private schools are usually from high-income families whereas public school students are mainly from average-income and low-income families. This is because private schools have their students' families pay for tuition. Tuition ranges from as low as $3,400 to as high as $10,000.
This tuition charge for private schools is the main reason most families aren't putting their children in such an institution. I agree that in a private school's learning atmosphere, a student can achieve much more than that of a student in a regular public school. Resources are abundant in a private school, especially when compared to the amount of resources in a regular public school. However, I disagree because magnet and charter schools are also excellent schools to send students to, even though they are public schools. That being said, it can be inferred that academics really do vary from school to school. I believe that families shouldn't try to spend money on an education if the student has no motivation to learn. For example, I didn't manage to stay in a magnet school simply because I did not want to go to school. Lack of motivation in the student is just a problem that is overlooked by parents.
Parents might end up disgruntled at the fact that their child is not doing any better in a private school. When it comes to academic achievements, the student obviously has to play his/her part. Morale and motivation to succeed and learn is imperative for a student to succeed in school. But, I think public schools should definitely imitate the system of private schools when it comes to academics. Students are actually pushed in private schools to finish with good grades and achieve a bachelor's degree from college. In my opinion, Public schools would be up to par with the achievement levels of private schools if they tried to follow the guidelines of a private school's curriculum. Therefore, Public schools and Private schools wouldn't be so different, besides tuition.
Detailed Reaction:
Do Private schools motivate students to academically achieve and go beyond? According to studies, yes, Private school students tend to achieve more academically and as a student when compared to public school students. I think that this statement can be proven, but it isn't exactly a fact that is set in stone. Students that go to private schools are usually from high-income families whereas public school students are mainly from average-income and low-income families. This is because private schools have their students' families pay for tuition. Tuition ranges from as low as $3,400 to as high as $10,000.
This tuition charge for private schools is the main reason most families aren't putting their children in such an institution. I agree that in a private school's learning atmosphere, a student can achieve much more than that of a student in a regular public school. Resources are abundant in a private school, especially when compared to the amount of resources in a regular public school. However, I disagree because magnet and charter schools are also excellent schools to send students to, even though they are public schools. That being said, it can be inferred that academics really do vary from school to school. I believe that families shouldn't try to spend money on an education if the student has no motivation to learn. For example, I didn't manage to stay in a magnet school simply because I did not want to go to school. Lack of motivation in the student is just a problem that is overlooked by parents.
Parents might end up disgruntled at the fact that their child is not doing any better in a private school. When it comes to academic achievements, the student obviously has to play his/her part. Morale and motivation to succeed and learn is imperative for a student to succeed in school. But, I think public schools should definitely imitate the system of private schools when it comes to academics. Students are actually pushed in private schools to finish with good grades and achieve a bachelor's degree from college. In my opinion, Public schools would be up to par with the achievement levels of private schools if they tried to follow the guidelines of a private school's curriculum. Therefore, Public schools and Private schools wouldn't be so different, besides tuition.
Monday, March 7, 2011
College Access
Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/college-access/
Detailed Reaction:
Moving on to college is a big step for some of us as students. College allows a person to pursue a higher education where a plethora of educational courses of all sorts are in existence. Pursuing a degree is a very smart move financially. College graduates with at least Bachelor's degrees tend to make much more money than that of a person with up to only a high school education. However, for those who are education and/or economically disadvantaged, there is a giant barrier between attending college and the student. Colleges, public and private, are getting more and more expensive when it comes to tuition.
This is causing economically-disadvantaged students that are also capable of attaining a college degree to not even consider a college education. Even though there are many financial aid opportunity programs present, potential students persist in saving themselves the money. From what I learned, there are 2 good investments in life: pursuing a college education, and buying a house. They result in "good" debt. In my opinion, I'd rather have a good job and still pay ridiculously large amounts of my money for loans, instead of working all day for a job with minimum wage.
I am also a student who can relate to this. I don't have the reserves of money to pay for a college education, so I'm going to have to be dependent on financial aid and educational opportunity programs such as EOP/HEOP/SEEK for admissions into respectable colleges, or even college at all. Without the existence of these programs, I seriously do not know what i would've done without knowing these programs existed. I just think it's in every capable student's best interests to pursue the degree he or she wants. The potential of these students are only being faltered because of money.
Detailed Reaction:
Moving on to college is a big step for some of us as students. College allows a person to pursue a higher education where a plethora of educational courses of all sorts are in existence. Pursuing a degree is a very smart move financially. College graduates with at least Bachelor's degrees tend to make much more money than that of a person with up to only a high school education. However, for those who are education and/or economically disadvantaged, there is a giant barrier between attending college and the student. Colleges, public and private, are getting more and more expensive when it comes to tuition.
This is causing economically-disadvantaged students that are also capable of attaining a college degree to not even consider a college education. Even though there are many financial aid opportunity programs present, potential students persist in saving themselves the money. From what I learned, there are 2 good investments in life: pursuing a college education, and buying a house. They result in "good" debt. In my opinion, I'd rather have a good job and still pay ridiculously large amounts of my money for loans, instead of working all day for a job with minimum wage.
I am also a student who can relate to this. I don't have the reserves of money to pay for a college education, so I'm going to have to be dependent on financial aid and educational opportunity programs such as EOP/HEOP/SEEK for admissions into respectable colleges, or even college at all. Without the existence of these programs, I seriously do not know what i would've done without knowing these programs existed. I just think it's in every capable student's best interests to pursue the degree he or she wants. The potential of these students are only being faltered because of money.
Low performing schools
Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/low-performing-schools/
Detailed Reaction:
Low performing schools are a problem that is difficult to deal with. There are obviously many things to account for. Students, teachers, and other faculty are be handled and dealt with when it comes to shutting down or taking over a failing school. I think that low-performance schools are one of the major annoyances of the education system.
Why do I say this? I state this because most overcrowding problems and uneven student-teacher ratios are rooted from the closing of a failing school. When the students and teachers are without a school, they have to move on to another school, if the students wish to finish school and if the teachers and faculty wish to be financially secured through jobs. This means that other high schools that may already have problems of their own will have to compensate for the students that are without a school. This will most likely lead to that other school being overcrowded. Therefore, this will become a cycle and soon, all schools will be hit by this "plague" of schools being shut down.
The new school will have to deal with these students most of who aren't exactly students that would survive in a college atmosphere, or even that of a normal high school. It's mainly because of the majority of students failing the majority of their classes. The only reasons that they tend to fail these classes are because of the difficulty, who the teacher is, how often they actually attend the class itself, the resources the school provides for supplemental education, and of course, the morale of each student. However, the government and the Board of Education are taking steps to fix this ongoing problem. Programs such as the "No Child Left Behind" have come into existence and they help by getting these students out of school so that the schools themselves will have to deal with less students and not more. I have a firm belief in the fact that these programs should come into play more often than these abundant takeovers and school closings. I'm in a similar program myself, and what this program does is that it helps to get the student get back on track and graduate on time or even earlier. These programs should receive more attention, and subsequently, more funding to save the Board of Education the trouble of having to deal with hundreds of school transfers.
Detailed Reaction:
Low performing schools are a problem that is difficult to deal with. There are obviously many things to account for. Students, teachers, and other faculty are be handled and dealt with when it comes to shutting down or taking over a failing school. I think that low-performance schools are one of the major annoyances of the education system.
Why do I say this? I state this because most overcrowding problems and uneven student-teacher ratios are rooted from the closing of a failing school. When the students and teachers are without a school, they have to move on to another school, if the students wish to finish school and if the teachers and faculty wish to be financially secured through jobs. This means that other high schools that may already have problems of their own will have to compensate for the students that are without a school. This will most likely lead to that other school being overcrowded. Therefore, this will become a cycle and soon, all schools will be hit by this "plague" of schools being shut down.
The new school will have to deal with these students most of who aren't exactly students that would survive in a college atmosphere, or even that of a normal high school. It's mainly because of the majority of students failing the majority of their classes. The only reasons that they tend to fail these classes are because of the difficulty, who the teacher is, how often they actually attend the class itself, the resources the school provides for supplemental education, and of course, the morale of each student. However, the government and the Board of Education are taking steps to fix this ongoing problem. Programs such as the "No Child Left Behind" have come into existence and they help by getting these students out of school so that the schools themselves will have to deal with less students and not more. I have a firm belief in the fact that these programs should come into play more often than these abundant takeovers and school closings. I'm in a similar program myself, and what this program does is that it helps to get the student get back on track and graduate on time or even earlier. These programs should receive more attention, and subsequently, more funding to save the Board of Education the trouble of having to deal with hundreds of school transfers.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Dropouts
Article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/dropouts/
Detailed Reaction:
Being a dropout is actually becoming normal for teenagers in high school. It usually starts off with the dropout failing all his/her classes because of excessive absences and/or failing test scores and project grades. Then, after the future dropout has become completely fed up, he/she decides to finally drop out of school and pursue a GED, or General Equivalency Degree. This degree is the equivalent of a local or regents high school diploma and it allows the owner to attend college and become a part of the workforce.
However, the article states that not all dropouts do what they initially intended to do. I agree, because i have seen dropouts say that they will get a GED and apply to community colleges so that they can get a associates degree and transfer to a 4 year college to get a bachelor's degree, and they ended up not achieving the GED. Studies also show that among dropouts are pregnant teens, delinquency, substance abuse, underage alcohol consumption and criminals. I don't think students should really drop out of school if they have a choice. High school diplomas aren't frowned upon like equivalency diplomas when applying to colleges. Preferences are given to the holders of high school diplomas in the pool of applicants for seats in a college or university. It's also the same thing with jobs. Employers prefer hiring actual high school graduates over GED holders.
However, if a person were to have no choice but to drop out, i think that person should pursue at least a bachelor's degree from an accredited college. CUNY and SUNY colleges are great for bachelor's degrees. There are opportunity programs for educationally and economically disadvantaged students, such as the EOP for State colleges/universities (such as SUNY), HEOP for private colleges/universities, and the SEEK/college discovery program which is for CUNY schools. Dropouts, in my opinion, are perfect candidates for meeting the educationally disadvantaged requirement of these programs. It's because of the existence of these programs that I believe dropouts still have the potential of High school graduates.
Detailed Reaction:
Being a dropout is actually becoming normal for teenagers in high school. It usually starts off with the dropout failing all his/her classes because of excessive absences and/or failing test scores and project grades. Then, after the future dropout has become completely fed up, he/she decides to finally drop out of school and pursue a GED, or General Equivalency Degree. This degree is the equivalent of a local or regents high school diploma and it allows the owner to attend college and become a part of the workforce.
However, the article states that not all dropouts do what they initially intended to do. I agree, because i have seen dropouts say that they will get a GED and apply to community colleges so that they can get a associates degree and transfer to a 4 year college to get a bachelor's degree, and they ended up not achieving the GED. Studies also show that among dropouts are pregnant teens, delinquency, substance abuse, underage alcohol consumption and criminals. I don't think students should really drop out of school if they have a choice. High school diplomas aren't frowned upon like equivalency diplomas when applying to colleges. Preferences are given to the holders of high school diplomas in the pool of applicants for seats in a college or university. It's also the same thing with jobs. Employers prefer hiring actual high school graduates over GED holders.
However, if a person were to have no choice but to drop out, i think that person should pursue at least a bachelor's degree from an accredited college. CUNY and SUNY colleges are great for bachelor's degrees. There are opportunity programs for educationally and economically disadvantaged students, such as the EOP for State colleges/universities (such as SUNY), HEOP for private colleges/universities, and the SEEK/college discovery program which is for CUNY schools. Dropouts, in my opinion, are perfect candidates for meeting the educationally disadvantaged requirement of these programs. It's because of the existence of these programs that I believe dropouts still have the potential of High school graduates.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
City Details Worst-Case School Layoffs
Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/28/nyregion/28layoffs.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=education&adxnnlx=1299004639-vGhoVbCsCeilQtoubofr2w
Detailed Reaction:
Layoff rates in the Education field of the work force are high compared to layoff rates in other fields. Budget cuts in schools are always present nowadays. The economy isn't in a good state as of the moment, and that has had a huge effect on public schools in New York City. Obviously, Public schools receive funding from the government, and this means that the faculty and staff are dependent on the funding as pay for their services. Because of these budget cuts, many teachers and faculty members are either getting lower than average wages or they're getting laid off.
I think the government should direct more funds towards education. Relatively new teachers are being laid off because of these seniority rules, and i believe that's unfair. Newer teachers know how to connect with the students and profess to them seeing that they are young themselves. New teachers tend to be around the ages of 22 to 28. Most tenured teachers, however, are not "up to par" with students' learning needs and wants. They teach students in a bland and repetitive manner, whereas newer teachers introduce new teaching methods and put them into play.
These budget cuts try to compensate for useless losses in the education system and other systems as well. I think these spending habits are irrational and the government officials should be wary that closing failing schools is just the beginning of a big problem. The more schools that close, the more teachers and students are without a job or education, so they'll try to transfer to other schools that may already be crowded. So, if this problem becomes ongoing, many students will be deprived of an education, and many more teachers will be unemployed and applying to jobs that are limited due to said budget cuts.
Detailed Reaction:
Layoff rates in the Education field of the work force are high compared to layoff rates in other fields. Budget cuts in schools are always present nowadays. The economy isn't in a good state as of the moment, and that has had a huge effect on public schools in New York City. Obviously, Public schools receive funding from the government, and this means that the faculty and staff are dependent on the funding as pay for their services. Because of these budget cuts, many teachers and faculty members are either getting lower than average wages or they're getting laid off.
I think the government should direct more funds towards education. Relatively new teachers are being laid off because of these seniority rules, and i believe that's unfair. Newer teachers know how to connect with the students and profess to them seeing that they are young themselves. New teachers tend to be around the ages of 22 to 28. Most tenured teachers, however, are not "up to par" with students' learning needs and wants. They teach students in a bland and repetitive manner, whereas newer teachers introduce new teaching methods and put them into play.
These budget cuts try to compensate for useless losses in the education system and other systems as well. I think these spending habits are irrational and the government officials should be wary that closing failing schools is just the beginning of a big problem. The more schools that close, the more teachers and students are without a job or education, so they'll try to transfer to other schools that may already be crowded. So, if this problem becomes ongoing, many students will be deprived of an education, and many more teachers will be unemployed and applying to jobs that are limited due to said budget cuts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)