Given the harm that the federal department of education does it should be closed. Cutting it by 90% won't work. It will grow back like a malignant cancer.
We cut the NC DPI by 50% in 1997 and now it is bigger than ever.
Seventy five percent of the federal government is unconstitutional. Not just the Department of Education. We need to close Agriculture, Energy, Environment and on and on.
GC: Respectfullly that sounds great for a person who is adamandtly opposed to a federal government, but it undermines almost any chance for our K-12 education system to recover in the forseeable future. My objective is to take the route that has the best chance for significantly improving our K-12 education system. I enumerated the reasons in my commentary. Essentially none of those will happen in the forseeable future if the DOEd is eliminated.
Pennsylvania has over 600 separate and "independent" school districts. So while it sounds simple to cut down to 10% of the USDE, that would leave say 6 people overseeing the the more than 600 INDEPENDENT districts. And that's just the 1-12 public schools. It's a lot like healthcare, we keep hearing the solution to the rising cost of healthcare is to CUT the healthcare individuals can receive, when we already only see a doctor 1/2 as often as the rest of the western world.
Frank: DOEd has noithing to do with a State's school districts. It interfaces with each State's State Board of Education. They are the ones overseeing the State's school districts.
John, the problem is that both the world and the world of teaching have gotten a great deal more complicated and we are fundamentally looking to reduce the cost. However, strip 90% out of any organization and it will collapse (private or government). Furthermore, the good people will be running for the door. - - Bottom line, the U. S.. is behind and we need to look to the countries that are winning and fund what is needed to replicate what they are proving works better than what we are doing. After all, there is nothing really new here other than the cost of our system and our reluctance to pay for it, i.e., we would much rather pay for a new football stadium than a library. - - - Yes a computer can solve essentially any math problem, however junk in still produces junk out and kids need to be well grounded in math to separate the two.
Frank: If the DOEd secretary clearly spelled out the NEW DOEd, good people would be flocking to it for a job.... Further, there actually are a lot of new education ideas, that show great promise - like I wrote about here <https://criticallythinking.substack.com/p/a-new-way-to-educate-k-12-students>. No State is doing anything like that, so again, proper DOEd leadership would make a profound difference.
I have taken the opportunity to correct a typo and to add several more important observations.
An important need for K-12 improvement is honest metrics.
Administrators constantly stay with "point" scores, and adjustable "passing" percentages, and, thereby, they lose all connectivity with previous years whenever tests are changed. There is no acceptable excuse for that. Relative metrics, based on standard deviations, yield much more helpful metrics. Specific examples of metrics, and how to employ them, have been presented to Superintendents (and newspapers) since the early 1990's. The only truly basic concept that is required is that the "tests" must be "good" tests. A "good" test is a test with a sufficient mix of "difficulty" in the questions such that differentiation can be determined among low performers and high performers. This means that the test results must present a "normal" (Gaussian) distribution of scores with no 0% scores and very few 100% scores. The actual average scores when comparing two cohorts who have taken the same test are not fundamentally important but the standard deviations for both cohorts (which should turn out to be the same) and the separation of the Average scores, measured in units of standard deviation, are the input parameters for "good" metrics. Metrics based on "passing percents" are valid only by employing the ratios of Pass%/Fail% for each cohort (no matter how many cohorts) since this is also a (dimensionless) "normalization.”
The system can still employ true Passing percentages for reasons of determining promotions, but for relative comparisons any arbitrary P% between the average Pass%'s can be chosen as the reference. A suitable normalized metric - one that can be transformed via a calibration plot into "units of standard deviation" gap is
Gap metric = [(PB%/FB%)]/[(PA%/FA%)], where F = 100-P is the corresponding failing percent, where A is the reference or leading or control cohort, and B is the secondary or lagging cohort being compared. If a series of "good tests are given to these cohorts the same value for Gap metric will be found. This metric has been tested and confirmed and can be easily explained. A value of 0.25, e.g., corresponds to about one half a full year's learning, a factor of two in tested knowledge, and about 0.85 units of standard deviation. And it applies to (gives the same answer as) all good tests (government NAEP tests, end-of-year State tests, SAT, ... for the same knowledge material).
Another easy metric for the public to understand when the issue is "What metric can we use to see if a gap is being closed between cohorts A and B?" is the answer to the question: What percentage of students in cohort B had scores below the 25-percentile score of cohort A. A (frightening? and typical ) value of about 63% will correspond to 0.85 units of standard deviation. An obvious goal measurement is the annual reduction of this 60+% value, but this is a very challenging goal since improvements must be achieved across the entire cohort. Is this being used? No.
An absolute “killer” in improving all student performances from where they are to where they could be is the propensity for U.S. public schools to place all students of the same age within the same grade level independently of their currently achieved performance levels. The range of abilities in a single class can be +/- two standard deviations. That is a ratio of 30 in student knowledge and is an impossible task for the teacher. There should be three tiers of performance, each receiving the necessary attention: the lowest 20%, the middle 60%, and the highest 20%. Every school should have facilities and teachers for all three ranges, and it is the Principal’s responsibility that every opportunity is given for enhancement to higher (and more difficult) standards.
The NCLB (No Child Left Behind) plan was a noble plan, but it totally failed when politicians began dabbling in foolish metrics, one that left the administrators no alternative (!!!) except to keep making the annual tests less difficult. A replacement plan that would work was rejected by the Congressional committee because they simply could not (would not) understand the basic elements of testing. That plan could be reintroduced. William T. Lynch, PhD bandglynch@gmail.com
John's argument that states' departments of education are presently dysfunctional, so action from the Federal level is needed, has merit. But today's problem exists precisely because of the existence of the DoEd. One of the arguments the Communists used was that the state would "wither away" — but of course it just got more powerful every day. The "withering away" should start at DoEd by forcing states back onto the rails, and then dismantling the mechanism that derailed them.
8. When I was in elementary school, for the last hour every Tuesday a member of my church would pick me up and take me for off-campus religious education. That couldn't be done on campus because each religion and sect would require a different venue, and somebody would surely have complained that Presbyterianism was getting a better deal than Lutheranism. That doesn't happen any more.
If DoEd doesn't enforce the laws, but instead abets violating them, what's the point if its existence? Add two more sections:
9. Vigorously enforce education-related provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title III prohibits discrimination in public libraries. Is this an education-related problem? It was definitely a problem on university campuses last year. Can DoEd help here? Title IV and Title VI prohibit discrimination based on race, color, or national origin This isn't a serious problem in K-12, but it is a serious problem in secondary education. Then there's Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to the Higher Education Act of 1965, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. This is a serious problem from top to bottom.
Tell states' and counties' education departments and schools everywhere "violate these provisions and the Federal gravy train dries up."
10. Concentrations of power are always a hazard. Apply anti-trust laws to teachers' unions and associations such as the ALA. At least some parts of the problems in education arise from having two nationwide teachers' unions, and one ALA, instead of one in each county. Yeah, I know that unions are presently exempt from anti-trust laws, so Congress needs to fix that. And while they're at it, they should prohibit all Federal public-service unions, which result in two parties negotiating from the same side of the table against the absent taxpayers (it was FDR who first enunciated this!).
An overall solution to many issues of whether or not schools should teach this or or that is to assign every Wednesday afternoon to the topic of "Community." There should be no church vs. state objections if parents authorize external teachers to address morality issues; sex, drugs, etc., as long as there are no religious services. The general purpose would be to acquaint students with all the functions of the community and the government to providing services both locally and nationwide. The students should realize these organizations are supporting their education as well. It is the perfect place to discuss civics and American (and world) history. Parents do not choose the latter teachers; it is the Principal's and the School Board's responsibility to present these topics uniformly and fairly. This is a time to introduce the library as well. Volunteer projects might be allowed for HS students.
An important need for K-12 improvement is honest metrics.
They constantly stay with "point" scores, and adjustable "passing" percentages, and, thereby, they lose all connectivity with previous years whenever tests are changed. There is no acceptable excuse for that. Relative metrics, based on standard deviations, yield much more helpful metrics. Specific examples of metrics, and how to employ them, have been presented to Superintendents (and newspapers) since the early 1990's. The only truly basic concept that is required is that the "tests" must be "good" tests. A "good" test is a test with a sufficient mix of "difficulty" in the questions such that differentiation can be determined among low performers and high performers. This means that the test results must present a "normal" (Gaussian) distribution of scores with no 0% scores and very few 100% scores. The actual average scores when comparing two cohorts who have taken the same test are not fundamentally important but the standard deviations for both cohorts (which should turn out to be the same) and the separation of the Average scores, measured in units of standard deviation are the input parameters for "good" metrics. Metrics based on "passing percents" are valid only by employing the ratios of Pass%/Fail% for each cohort (no matter how many cohorts) since this is also a (dimensionless) "normalization.
The system can still employ true Passing percentages for reasons of determining promotions, but for relative comparisons any arbitrary P% between the average Pass%'s can be chosen as the reference. A suitable normalized metric - one that can be transformed via a calibration plot into "units of standard deviation" gap is
Gap metric = [(PB%/FB%)]/[(PA%/FA%)], where B is the reference or leading or control cohort and B is the secondary or lagging cohort being compared. If a series of "good tests are given to these cohorts the same value for Gap metric will be found. This metric has been tested and confirmed and can be easily explained. A value of 0.25, e.g., corresponds to about one half a full year's learning and about 0.85 units of standard deviation.
Another easy metric for the public to understand when the issue is "What metric can we use to see if a gap is being closed between cohorts A and B?" is the answer to the question: What percentage of students in cohort B had scores below the 25-percentile score of cohort A. A (frightening?) value of about 63% will correspond to 0.85 units of standard deviation. An obvious goal measurement is the annual reduction of this 60+% value. Is this being used? No.
The NCLB (No Child Left Behind) plan was a noble plan, but it totally failed when politicians began dabbling in foolish metrics, one that left the administrators no alternative (!!!) except to keep making the annual tests less difficult. A replacement plan that would work was rejected by the Congressional committee because they simply could not (would not) understand the basic elements of testing. That plan could be reintroduced. William T. Lynch, PhD
When Ronald Reagan was elected president, he wanted to close the DoEd, but Bill Bennett, his SecEd talked him out of it, saying, if WE lead it we can fix it! Even after 8 years, it was not fixed. And as soon as Dems were in the Whitehouse, they went back to making it worse. The installed base of teachers and administrators mostly have a world view completely contradictory to most Americans, hence how they continue their DEI, CRT, sexually explicit instruction while not teaching kids to read, write & do math. The only way to fix it is to get government money out as much as possible, lower taxes and let truly free-market choices develop encumbered by federal or state control. Government funded school choice will only serve to allow government regulation to begin to undermine the free-market choices available today, home & private school. This is how we are changing media, an alternate free market media! Your idea sounds good on paper, but central planning never works! Our founders knew.
Melanie: yes we should learn from past failures. Defaulting to each State to fix the K-12 education mess — which is about 75% their fault in the first place — is simply resorting to Central Planning on a State level. If done as I've outlined above, it will be the most significant K-12 education revolution in history.
One thing they can do immediately is stop the adoption of educational instruction originating on California. This is where most of the platforms in our education now comes from. Also, they can look for another school book publisher other than who they use now. The books as they are now need to be done away with as they are filled with wrong teaching. We need to stop treating students as if they are small adults. They are not. They are children and young people learning to be adults. It is time to teach and treat people that they are not entitled to anything other than protection, food and shelter. Go back to teaching accountability and responsibility. Teach cursive writing again. Go over homework papers making sure that everyone has the correct answers. Don't grade on a curve. Teach instead of being overburdened with paper work. Cut out some of the extra curriculum and clubs. You are going to school for an education. It is not a social club agenda. Encourage parents to participate in school decisions. As with every intellectual stop looking down on people that do not have a college degree. A degree has nothing whatever to do with common sense or intelligence. Stop encouraging students who should not even be graduating high school to go to college. Encourage all students to learn real life skills. Teach kids how to do math without a machine. Teach them how to think. Math is not an estimate. It is an exact science and it is not racist.
I love your list of recommendations. Overcoming the abject satanic/humanistic/materialistic ideas/practices/beliefs that permeate this entire system top to bottom is the Herculean task of the ages to say the least. I see it, just as you do--it can only be saved top to bottom. Only with a new beginning, the right leadership, and maybe 300 loyal Spartans can this system be saved.
the federal government is a government of limited powers. every act it performs must be traceable to a specific grant of power in the constitution. it's widely accepted among legal scholars that the federal constitution grants no police power to the federal government. 'police power' in this context does not refer to police, as in police departments... it refers to the making of policy for the general welfare. the states, on the other hand, have plenary power to legislate for the general welfare
so news flash, there is no constitutional authory for the federal government to provide for education or to make policies about it. but dont take my word for it. read the constitution yourself and see what it does and doesnt provide for
when you talk about a federal department of 'education' displacing the state depertments of education, you have entered the dreamland of euro-style centralized discipline and control. it does work that way in germany, but here in the US we do it quite a bit differently
again, if you have not educated yourself on the basic contitutional structure of the US, it doesnt make a lot of sense to plan on how a collective education program would work in the US
so, you're all wrong about that, but that's not my fundamental point of disagreement with you
the problem with education isnt that they dont teach proper science or critical thinking. nor is it even that all proposals for supposed reforms of education are part of collective thinking, which is always a miserable failure
the problem with education is education
and i dont mean the way that it's done, but that people believe education solves problems. it doesnt. it is the problem
people understand education as an accretive process of acquiring knowledge, of a development of theories, or beliefs, about how the world operates, about a testing of these beliefs and an application of those beliefs seen as passing the test
the education process reflects the way most people age. they start out with no theories and know what is real, then they slowly accumualte theories that they apply to reality every day. in this way, despite starting out totally sane, they become more and more anxious, angry and insane as they age. it's why children, before they are educated, look at the adults and wonder, what's wrong with the grown-ups?
before you were born, you knew everything you needed to know. a collective process of teaching children that they dont know is a form of grievous violence
good riddance to the federal department of education. and may god speed the abolition of all 50 states DOE's as well
RBX: The Constitution says nothing about the EPA or several other federal agencies. The question is not so much the words of the Constitution, but rather what is the best way to fix the deplorable K-12 situation.
Because human nature is what it is, once elected to a County or State Board of Education, the newly elected person soon realizes everything flows down hill from Washington, so compliance becomes the norm and kids loose. It's also easier to be compliant since you don't have to fight the system.
I live in a town with more than one bank and as a result competition ensues and service improves. Monopolies, whether banks or the Federal Dept of Educ., don't produce good results. And the results diminish with each passing year. And, most organizations that get further away from the people become more culturally distant too. Remember, Tip O'Neal told us all politics is local. The Fed. Dept of Educ becomes remote except from the mindset inside the beltway.
With several hundred employess ONLY, the Federal Dept of Educ. could study competing State education models and disseminate that information. Remember, we're in a day when companies can move to better environments for their employees. So....imagine States wanted to improve education so as to attract employers. Oh, wow....that would get us going again.
Marty: There is nothing in my explanation that restricts or discourages States from being creative and improving their K-12 education product! That said, so far such K-12 education creativity from States has been miniscule at best. If done right, DOEd can provide much needed direction and leadership.
I've worked inside systems for so long that I see how systems eventually loose their way and then choke off any threat to their existence. There is an old sociological truth: "the idea that creates the institution will be destroyed by the insitituion." Hence, in an era of instant communication excellence moves quickly when those who hold the money don't get in the way. So, keep the money and the agency of responsibility local, where folks from the community can reach out and touch someone. Then community voices are heard rather than ignored.
Marty: That sounds good, but in reality does not work. For example, local people have nothing to do with teacher certification. Local people have nothing to do with state certification exams. Local people have nothing to do with Science standards, etc., etc., etc.
John, Interesting point is that the best performing network of schools in America is Great Hearts. In their State (Arizona) teacher certification is not rquired in charter schools (or at least it wasn't last time I checked - years ago). They simply hire subject matter experts (some of whom happen to be certified teachers).
I hired a head of school that wanted to go Classical, but had never been involved in Classical. She simply knew that Progressive education was broken. So, I hired her a consultant that met with her every month, during the formation year of the school. She'd call every month and complain that it made no sense, and she didn't like it (classical, that is). Then after about 4 months she called me screaming for joy and saying (almost yelling): "I get it, I get it, I get it. I love it. This is incredible. And on and on she went." Then when she calmed down and I could get her attention, I said: "Kerin, it was always in you, it had just be trained out of you." So, be careful with certification. In the best of all worlds the school the Principal and Academic officer carry the water on this and train their staff. It is these "certified" teachers that are the key element of a totally broken system.
Given the harm that the federal department of education does it should be closed. Cutting it by 90% won't work. It will grow back like a malignant cancer.
We cut the NC DPI by 50% in 1997 and now it is bigger than ever.
Seventy five percent of the federal government is unconstitutional. Not just the Department of Education. We need to close Agriculture, Energy, Environment and on and on.
GC: Respectfullly that sounds great for a person who is adamandtly opposed to a federal government, but it undermines almost any chance for our K-12 education system to recover in the forseeable future. My objective is to take the route that has the best chance for significantly improving our K-12 education system. I enumerated the reasons in my commentary. Essentially none of those will happen in the forseeable future if the DOEd is eliminated.
Pennsylvania has over 600 separate and "independent" school districts. So while it sounds simple to cut down to 10% of the USDE, that would leave say 6 people overseeing the the more than 600 INDEPENDENT districts. And that's just the 1-12 public schools. It's a lot like healthcare, we keep hearing the solution to the rising cost of healthcare is to CUT the healthcare individuals can receive, when we already only see a doctor 1/2 as often as the rest of the western world.
Frank: DOEd has noithing to do with a State's school districts. It interfaces with each State's State Board of Education. They are the ones overseeing the State's school districts.
It's not too disimilar to treating cancer. You have to nearly kill the patient with cemo , to hopefully save them. I pray for success
Tim: yes, there are some similarities.
John, the problem is that both the world and the world of teaching have gotten a great deal more complicated and we are fundamentally looking to reduce the cost. However, strip 90% out of any organization and it will collapse (private or government). Furthermore, the good people will be running for the door. - - Bottom line, the U. S.. is behind and we need to look to the countries that are winning and fund what is needed to replicate what they are proving works better than what we are doing. After all, there is nothing really new here other than the cost of our system and our reluctance to pay for it, i.e., we would much rather pay for a new football stadium than a library. - - - Yes a computer can solve essentially any math problem, however junk in still produces junk out and kids need to be well grounded in math to separate the two.
Frank: If the DOEd secretary clearly spelled out the NEW DOEd, good people would be flocking to it for a job.... Further, there actually are a lot of new education ideas, that show great promise - like I wrote about here <https://criticallythinking.substack.com/p/a-new-way-to-educate-k-12-students>. No State is doing anything like that, so again, proper DOEd leadership would make a profound difference.
There is so much disfuncion at the DOEd I'm not sure they are objective or capable. It's the fox guarding the henhouse. Is there anyone else?
Tim: That's why I recommended culling out 90%+ of the existiung people, and starting over.
Who are considered the top 5 educational systems in the world. There must be some lessons from them .
Tim: That's a good point. Again that is a study that would be most appropriate to be overseen and funded by DOEd as vs a State.
William Lynch
I have taken the opportunity to correct a typo and to add several more important observations.
An important need for K-12 improvement is honest metrics.
Administrators constantly stay with "point" scores, and adjustable "passing" percentages, and, thereby, they lose all connectivity with previous years whenever tests are changed. There is no acceptable excuse for that. Relative metrics, based on standard deviations, yield much more helpful metrics. Specific examples of metrics, and how to employ them, have been presented to Superintendents (and newspapers) since the early 1990's. The only truly basic concept that is required is that the "tests" must be "good" tests. A "good" test is a test with a sufficient mix of "difficulty" in the questions such that differentiation can be determined among low performers and high performers. This means that the test results must present a "normal" (Gaussian) distribution of scores with no 0% scores and very few 100% scores. The actual average scores when comparing two cohorts who have taken the same test are not fundamentally important but the standard deviations for both cohorts (which should turn out to be the same) and the separation of the Average scores, measured in units of standard deviation, are the input parameters for "good" metrics. Metrics based on "passing percents" are valid only by employing the ratios of Pass%/Fail% for each cohort (no matter how many cohorts) since this is also a (dimensionless) "normalization.”
The system can still employ true Passing percentages for reasons of determining promotions, but for relative comparisons any arbitrary P% between the average Pass%'s can be chosen as the reference. A suitable normalized metric - one that can be transformed via a calibration plot into "units of standard deviation" gap is
Gap metric = [(PB%/FB%)]/[(PA%/FA%)], where F = 100-P is the corresponding failing percent, where A is the reference or leading or control cohort, and B is the secondary or lagging cohort being compared. If a series of "good tests are given to these cohorts the same value for Gap metric will be found. This metric has been tested and confirmed and can be easily explained. A value of 0.25, e.g., corresponds to about one half a full year's learning, a factor of two in tested knowledge, and about 0.85 units of standard deviation. And it applies to (gives the same answer as) all good tests (government NAEP tests, end-of-year State tests, SAT, ... for the same knowledge material).
Another easy metric for the public to understand when the issue is "What metric can we use to see if a gap is being closed between cohorts A and B?" is the answer to the question: What percentage of students in cohort B had scores below the 25-percentile score of cohort A. A (frightening? and typical ) value of about 63% will correspond to 0.85 units of standard deviation. An obvious goal measurement is the annual reduction of this 60+% value, but this is a very challenging goal since improvements must be achieved across the entire cohort. Is this being used? No.
An absolute “killer” in improving all student performances from where they are to where they could be is the propensity for U.S. public schools to place all students of the same age within the same grade level independently of their currently achieved performance levels. The range of abilities in a single class can be +/- two standard deviations. That is a ratio of 30 in student knowledge and is an impossible task for the teacher. There should be three tiers of performance, each receiving the necessary attention: the lowest 20%, the middle 60%, and the highest 20%. Every school should have facilities and teachers for all three ranges, and it is the Principal’s responsibility that every opportunity is given for enhancement to higher (and more difficult) standards.
The NCLB (No Child Left Behind) plan was a noble plan, but it totally failed when politicians began dabbling in foolish metrics, one that left the administrators no alternative (!!!) except to keep making the annual tests less difficult. A replacement plan that would work was rejected by the Congressional committee because they simply could not (would not) understand the basic elements of testing. That plan could be reintroduced. William T. Lynch, PhD bandglynch@gmail.com
John's argument that states' departments of education are presently dysfunctional, so action from the Federal level is needed, has merit. But today's problem exists precisely because of the existence of the DoEd. One of the arguments the Communists used was that the state would "wither away" — but of course it just got more powerful every day. The "withering away" should start at DoEd by forcing states back onto the rails, and then dismantling the mechanism that derailed them.
8. When I was in elementary school, for the last hour every Tuesday a member of my church would pick me up and take me for off-campus religious education. That couldn't be done on campus because each religion and sect would require a different venue, and somebody would surely have complained that Presbyterianism was getting a better deal than Lutheranism. That doesn't happen any more.
If DoEd doesn't enforce the laws, but instead abets violating them, what's the point if its existence? Add two more sections:
9. Vigorously enforce education-related provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title III prohibits discrimination in public libraries. Is this an education-related problem? It was definitely a problem on university campuses last year. Can DoEd help here? Title IV and Title VI prohibit discrimination based on race, color, or national origin This isn't a serious problem in K-12, but it is a serious problem in secondary education. Then there's Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to the Higher Education Act of 1965, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. This is a serious problem from top to bottom.
Tell states' and counties' education departments and schools everywhere "violate these provisions and the Federal gravy train dries up."
10. Concentrations of power are always a hazard. Apply anti-trust laws to teachers' unions and associations such as the ALA. At least some parts of the problems in education arise from having two nationwide teachers' unions, and one ALA, instead of one in each county. Yeah, I know that unions are presently exempt from anti-trust laws, so Congress needs to fix that. And while they're at it, they should prohibit all Federal public-service unions, which result in two parties negotiating from the same side of the table against the absent taxpayers (it was FDR who first enunciated this!).
William Lynch
An overall solution to many issues of whether or not schools should teach this or or that is to assign every Wednesday afternoon to the topic of "Community." There should be no church vs. state objections if parents authorize external teachers to address morality issues; sex, drugs, etc., as long as there are no religious services. The general purpose would be to acquaint students with all the functions of the community and the government to providing services both locally and nationwide. The students should realize these organizations are supporting their education as well. It is the perfect place to discuss civics and American (and world) history. Parents do not choose the latter teachers; it is the Principal's and the School Board's responsibility to present these topics uniformly and fairly. This is a time to introduce the library as well. Volunteer projects might be allowed for HS students.
Van: Thank you for the good additional thoughts that DOEd should consider.
An important need for K-12 improvement is honest metrics.
They constantly stay with "point" scores, and adjustable "passing" percentages, and, thereby, they lose all connectivity with previous years whenever tests are changed. There is no acceptable excuse for that. Relative metrics, based on standard deviations, yield much more helpful metrics. Specific examples of metrics, and how to employ them, have been presented to Superintendents (and newspapers) since the early 1990's. The only truly basic concept that is required is that the "tests" must be "good" tests. A "good" test is a test with a sufficient mix of "difficulty" in the questions such that differentiation can be determined among low performers and high performers. This means that the test results must present a "normal" (Gaussian) distribution of scores with no 0% scores and very few 100% scores. The actual average scores when comparing two cohorts who have taken the same test are not fundamentally important but the standard deviations for both cohorts (which should turn out to be the same) and the separation of the Average scores, measured in units of standard deviation are the input parameters for "good" metrics. Metrics based on "passing percents" are valid only by employing the ratios of Pass%/Fail% for each cohort (no matter how many cohorts) since this is also a (dimensionless) "normalization.
The system can still employ true Passing percentages for reasons of determining promotions, but for relative comparisons any arbitrary P% between the average Pass%'s can be chosen as the reference. A suitable normalized metric - one that can be transformed via a calibration plot into "units of standard deviation" gap is
Gap metric = [(PB%/FB%)]/[(PA%/FA%)], where B is the reference or leading or control cohort and B is the secondary or lagging cohort being compared. If a series of "good tests are given to these cohorts the same value for Gap metric will be found. This metric has been tested and confirmed and can be easily explained. A value of 0.25, e.g., corresponds to about one half a full year's learning and about 0.85 units of standard deviation.
Another easy metric for the public to understand when the issue is "What metric can we use to see if a gap is being closed between cohorts A and B?" is the answer to the question: What percentage of students in cohort B had scores below the 25-percentile score of cohort A. A (frightening?) value of about 63% will correspond to 0.85 units of standard deviation. An obvious goal measurement is the annual reduction of this 60+% value. Is this being used? No.
The NCLB (No Child Left Behind) plan was a noble plan, but it totally failed when politicians began dabbling in foolish metrics, one that left the administrators no alternative (!!!) except to keep making the annual tests less difficult. A replacement plan that would work was rejected by the Congressional committee because they simply could not (would not) understand the basic elements of testing. That plan could be reintroduced. William T. Lynch, PhD
William: I don't have any serious objections to what you are advocating.
When Ronald Reagan was elected president, he wanted to close the DoEd, but Bill Bennett, his SecEd talked him out of it, saying, if WE lead it we can fix it! Even after 8 years, it was not fixed. And as soon as Dems were in the Whitehouse, they went back to making it worse. The installed base of teachers and administrators mostly have a world view completely contradictory to most Americans, hence how they continue their DEI, CRT, sexually explicit instruction while not teaching kids to read, write & do math. The only way to fix it is to get government money out as much as possible, lower taxes and let truly free-market choices develop encumbered by federal or state control. Government funded school choice will only serve to allow government regulation to begin to undermine the free-market choices available today, home & private school. This is how we are changing media, an alternate free market media! Your idea sounds good on paper, but central planning never works! Our founders knew.
Melanie: yes we should learn from past failures. Defaulting to each State to fix the K-12 education mess — which is about 75% their fault in the first place — is simply resorting to Central Planning on a State level. If done as I've outlined above, it will be the most significant K-12 education revolution in history.
One thing they can do immediately is stop the adoption of educational instruction originating on California. This is where most of the platforms in our education now comes from. Also, they can look for another school book publisher other than who they use now. The books as they are now need to be done away with as they are filled with wrong teaching. We need to stop treating students as if they are small adults. They are not. They are children and young people learning to be adults. It is time to teach and treat people that they are not entitled to anything other than protection, food and shelter. Go back to teaching accountability and responsibility. Teach cursive writing again. Go over homework papers making sure that everyone has the correct answers. Don't grade on a curve. Teach instead of being overburdened with paper work. Cut out some of the extra curriculum and clubs. You are going to school for an education. It is not a social club agenda. Encourage parents to participate in school decisions. As with every intellectual stop looking down on people that do not have a college degree. A degree has nothing whatever to do with common sense or intelligence. Stop encouraging students who should not even be graduating high school to go to college. Encourage all students to learn real life skills. Teach kids how to do math without a machine. Teach them how to think. Math is not an estimate. It is an exact science and it is not racist.
Carolyn. I have no disagreement with anything you wrote.
I love your list of recommendations. Overcoming the abject satanic/humanistic/materialistic ideas/practices/beliefs that permeate this entire system top to bottom is the Herculean task of the ages to say the least. I see it, just as you do--it can only be saved top to bottom. Only with a new beginning, the right leadership, and maybe 300 loyal Spartans can this system be saved.
Clare: TY.No option is perfect, but of the options available to us, this clearly is the best.
the federal government is a government of limited powers. every act it performs must be traceable to a specific grant of power in the constitution. it's widely accepted among legal scholars that the federal constitution grants no police power to the federal government. 'police power' in this context does not refer to police, as in police departments... it refers to the making of policy for the general welfare. the states, on the other hand, have plenary power to legislate for the general welfare
so news flash, there is no constitutional authory for the federal government to provide for education or to make policies about it. but dont take my word for it. read the constitution yourself and see what it does and doesnt provide for
when you talk about a federal department of 'education' displacing the state depertments of education, you have entered the dreamland of euro-style centralized discipline and control. it does work that way in germany, but here in the US we do it quite a bit differently
again, if you have not educated yourself on the basic contitutional structure of the US, it doesnt make a lot of sense to plan on how a collective education program would work in the US
so, you're all wrong about that, but that's not my fundamental point of disagreement with you
the problem with education isnt that they dont teach proper science or critical thinking. nor is it even that all proposals for supposed reforms of education are part of collective thinking, which is always a miserable failure
the problem with education is education
and i dont mean the way that it's done, but that people believe education solves problems. it doesnt. it is the problem
people understand education as an accretive process of acquiring knowledge, of a development of theories, or beliefs, about how the world operates, about a testing of these beliefs and an application of those beliefs seen as passing the test
the education process reflects the way most people age. they start out with no theories and know what is real, then they slowly accumualte theories that they apply to reality every day. in this way, despite starting out totally sane, they become more and more anxious, angry and insane as they age. it's why children, before they are educated, look at the adults and wonder, what's wrong with the grown-ups?
before you were born, you knew everything you needed to know. a collective process of teaching children that they dont know is a form of grievous violence
good riddance to the federal department of education. and may god speed the abolition of all 50 states DOE's as well
RBX: The Constitution says nothing about the EPA or several other federal agencies. The question is not so much the words of the Constitution, but rather what is the best way to fix the deplorable K-12 situation.
Because human nature is what it is, once elected to a County or State Board of Education, the newly elected person soon realizes everything flows down hill from Washington, so compliance becomes the norm and kids loose. It's also easier to be compliant since you don't have to fight the system.
I live in a town with more than one bank and as a result competition ensues and service improves. Monopolies, whether banks or the Federal Dept of Educ., don't produce good results. And the results diminish with each passing year. And, most organizations that get further away from the people become more culturally distant too. Remember, Tip O'Neal told us all politics is local. The Fed. Dept of Educ becomes remote except from the mindset inside the beltway.
With several hundred employess ONLY, the Federal Dept of Educ. could study competing State education models and disseminate that information. Remember, we're in a day when companies can move to better environments for their employees. So....imagine States wanted to improve education so as to attract employers. Oh, wow....that would get us going again.
Marty: There is nothing in my explanation that restricts or discourages States from being creative and improving their K-12 education product! That said, so far such K-12 education creativity from States has been miniscule at best. If done right, DOEd can provide much needed direction and leadership.
I've worked inside systems for so long that I see how systems eventually loose their way and then choke off any threat to their existence. There is an old sociological truth: "the idea that creates the institution will be destroyed by the insitituion." Hence, in an era of instant communication excellence moves quickly when those who hold the money don't get in the way. So, keep the money and the agency of responsibility local, where folks from the community can reach out and touch someone. Then community voices are heard rather than ignored.
Marty: That sounds good, but in reality does not work. For example, local people have nothing to do with teacher certification. Local people have nothing to do with state certification exams. Local people have nothing to do with Science standards, etc., etc., etc.
John, Interesting point is that the best performing network of schools in America is Great Hearts. In their State (Arizona) teacher certification is not rquired in charter schools (or at least it wasn't last time I checked - years ago). They simply hire subject matter experts (some of whom happen to be certified teachers).
I hired a head of school that wanted to go Classical, but had never been involved in Classical. She simply knew that Progressive education was broken. So, I hired her a consultant that met with her every month, during the formation year of the school. She'd call every month and complain that it made no sense, and she didn't like it (classical, that is). Then after about 4 months she called me screaming for joy and saying (almost yelling): "I get it, I get it, I get it. I love it. This is incredible. And on and on she went." Then when she calmed down and I could get her attention, I said: "Kerin, it was always in you, it had just be trained out of you." So, be careful with certification. In the best of all worlds the school the Principal and Academic officer carry the water on this and train their staff. It is these "certified" teachers that are the key element of a totally broken system.
Marty: what you say can certainly be done for a few schools, but absolutely can not be done for thousands.