Reflection on presentations 10/01/07

Presentation 1- Graduation and Dropout Rates

I think that a high school diploma is a good predictor of future acheivement, and not having one puts young adults at a disadvantage. I was a bit startled by the numbers once the group broke them down - 7,000 children are dropping out each day?! It seems to me that we are failing a rather large number of students. Another statistic that intrigued me was the fact that children retained in elementary school are more likely to drop out. I wonder why, and I also wonder if this is a causal relationship, or if there is an outside factor (SES anyone?) influencing both of these things.

I'd like to say that I was surprised by the fact that there are higher dropout rates in urban areas, unfortunately that seems to be the pattern. The education system appears to consistently fail children of varying ethnicities and low socioeconomic status, both of which are found in large numbers in urban areas. We need to alter our curriculum to set these children up to succeed and become productive members of our society, and so far we are not succeeding. I had previously said that I did not feel education was currently in crisis, but that we needed to be aware of and address certain discrepancies. After this presentation, I'm still not sure if I feel education as a whole is in crisis, but knowing that less than half of high school students in Philadelphia are graduating...that's certainly a wake up call.

Presentation 2 - PSSA Scores by Demographic

This presentation also reinforces the fact that minority students and students of lower socioeconomic status are consistenly receiving lower scores. As we touched on in our presentation on PSSA scores, I think that some of this has to do with the structure of the test itself, and a variety of biases that exist in the test itself as well as the procedure for taking the test. I also think that it goes back to the undeniable and sad truth that, in general, upper class white students are affored more opportunities within their education. Schools in poor urban areas tend to have less resources, more students, and fewer qualified teachers, so is it any wonder that they are not doing as well as students in districts where there are more resources or a better student to teacher ratio?

One thing I really liked about this presentation was that they offered a series of possible "first steps" toward change. I was also interested in the idea of schools funding social services programs to try and bridge the gap.

Presentation 3-NAEP Results for Ages 9,13,17 and Graduaiton Rates

I think that the fact that there has been so litle change between 1971-2004 could possibly indicate that our current methods aren't working, but again it goes back to my opinion that standardized tests aren't an accurate measure of ability. I don't know how much those numbers reflect what is really happening. I do think that the discrepancy between the scores of whites versus other ethnicities is pretty clear, across all presentations. The fact that we have more children in high school than other countries could be encouraging, but I don't know enough about education in other countries to really understand this data. My favorite part about this presentation was the question posed at the end. Namely, is this a true crisis, or the perception of a crisis created for personal or political agendas? Can it be a little bit of both?

And now...Gleichert's Formula for Social Change

When this formula was first introduced to us, I though of it strictly in terms of our current situation, with our dissatisfaction being with No Child Left Behind. After looking at all the PowerPoints, it seems that some of the same problems existed before NCLB was put into effect. There was a large discrepancy between the quality of education that different populations were receiving before NCLB, and maybe that was the intial dissatisfation. Maybe teachers had the same vision then that we do now, i.e., a vision of a future in which all children could develop a love of learning, and not be shortchanged by the education system. So does that mean that NCLB was designed to be a first step? Possibly, but I happen to believe it was a first step in the wrong direction. Then again, all of the problems that have arisen and will continue to arise from NCLB have led to a good deal of dialogue about education, and I think that's a good thing. Maybe we can learn from our mistakes (isn't that the best way?) and start headed in a different direction. Perhaps I am being overly optimistic, but I do know that right now, many of us have expressed our dissatisfation with many of the things we see happening in (or to) our schools. I think we all have a vision of something better, and that's why we are all here. And aren't these our first steps - talking, questioning, and applying what we learn in these classes and through these conversations? I know that resistance is still pretty strong right now, but I don't think it always will be. I still believe that social change is possible, and that on some level we are all a part of it.