Developing World Class Schools and Graduates
Diploma’s Count, published by Editorial Projects in Education Research Center lists the states with the highest and lowest graduation rate:
Highest Graduation Rate Lowest Graduation Rate
New Jersey 83.3% Nevada 45.4%
Iowa 82.8% New Mexico 54.1%
Wisconsin 80.5% Louisiana 54.7%
Pennsylvania 80.4% South Carolina 55.6%
Vermont 80.2% Georgia 58.1%
What do the highest graduating states have in common?
What do the lowest graduating states have in common?
Politicians look for short-term, immediate “solutions” to complex problems. They have been trained to think and speak in terms of 17 second sound bites that can make the evenings news.
Unfortunately the solutions to America’s school crisis cannot be solved simply or quickly. The problems are too complex. (Do they know that some school buildings are still being heated with coal? Do they know that some of you work in “temporary buildings”, in use for 20 years that lack running water or bathrooms. Do they know that students (and teachers) work in the early part of the summer, in buildings without air conditioning where the temperature goes beyond 90 degrees.” This is no way to treat professionals.
We need politicians who realize these problems and take time to address them. When it comes time to vote in state, local and federal elections, remember to ask, do they address the issues that you believe are most critical to you and the children you serve?
Somebody should come up with a bumper sticker which says, “I am an educator. I make a difference because I vote.”
Perri Applegate from the University of Oklahoma’s K-20 Center investigated high and low-achieving rural high schools. Dr. Applegate found that the top factors that impacted student achievement in urban schools -test scores, student-teacher ratio and a rigorous curriculum – did not determine student success in rural schools. In high performing rural schools, the determining factors was the community’s involvement and the school’s commitment to student success. Teachers in rural schools also are more flexible in their teaching technique.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080619174221.htm
Speaking on the topic, “Building America’s Competitiveness: From the Schoolhouse to The Workplace”
The global marketplace has become reality. No longer do companies compete solely in domestic markets. Faxes, cell phones and the Internet have globalized the world. Businesses are no longer geographically bound to produce products in their home countries. Neither are they geographically bound in their hiring practices. Companies are capable of flying around the globe in search of cheap labor, to places where taxes are reasonable, regulations are limited, and where workers are qualified to run, repair, design and develop machinery.
Our schools must be as globally competitive as businesses. The best graduates from Raleigh’s schools are not competing for jobs with the best graduates from Durham’s schools but with the best graduates in the world.
Parents have many valid reasons to home school their children. These include the safety of their children, low-performing public schools and religious reasons. But the question to be asked and answered, are children who are enrolled in home schools learning anything? And do we measure?
New Mexico’s Department of Education mandates that home schooled children receive “a basic academic, educational program, including, but not limited to, reading, language, arts, mathematics, social studies and science.” But the Department does not have the capacity to monitor whether children in the state who are being home schooled are actually receiving that instruction.
New Mexico is one of 14 states with “low regulation”. Low regulation is defined as requiring parents notify the state that children are being educated.
Twenty states require parents to send notification, test scores and/or a professional evaluation of a students progress to the state.
Six states with “high regulation” require home visits by state officials, teacher qualification of parents and a curriculum approved by the state. In Pennsylvania, for example, parents are required to file an affidavit assuring the state that subjects are taught in English, give an outline of proposed education objectives by subject area and provide evidence of immunization.
Ten states including Texas, have no regulation.
I will be speaking on the topic, Building America’s Competitiveness: From the School House to the Workplace.
I will be delivering two sessions in South Dakota for the South Dakota Department of Education and the Black Hills Special Services Cooperative, Transition Services Project. September 22 in Sioux Falls and September 24 in Rapid City.
I will be speaking on the Topic: Helping Students Graduate: Tools and Strategies to Prevent Student Dropouts.
Today, almost one-third of our K-12 students never graduate – increasing the likelihood of their imprisonment, single parenthood, poverty and the use of alcohol and drugs.
Using the 15 effective strategies developed by the National Dropout Prevention Center and tools developed as “best practices” by some of America’s outstanding schools and programs, workshop participants will not only learn what to do but how to aid at-risk youth to graduate.
In an article written by Claudia Wallis for the June 8th issue of Time Magazine, Susan Neuman, the former Assistant Secretary for Elementary & Secondary Education during George W. Bush’s first term, reveals that NCLB served as a Trojan horse for the school choice agenda and a way to expose the failure of public education. She states, “There were a number of people pushing hard for market forces and privatization.” While she and a number of others argued that many schools would fail to reach the NCLB goals and needed more flexibility while making improvements, they were ignored.
The current Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, has modified the NCLB approach to school accountability by going to the ‘growth model.’ Ms. Neuman says, “Going to the growth models is the right way to go. I wish it had come earlier. It didn’t because we were trying to be too tough. Vilifying teachers and saying we are going to shame them was not the right approach. There’s so much anger that it (NCLB) might not be fixable.”