More on Education “Technology”
I struggled a bit (FINE, more than just a little) when I tried to address the results of the study done by the Department of Education on using Technology (specifically “software”) for education.
However, in BusinessWeek this week, U.S. Representative Ron Kind (D-WI), does an excellent job of juggling the issues with the results, and showing how it was A Flawed Measure.
The finding raises the question whether this nation should only invest in tools whose effectiveness can be measured through test scores.
As I noted, this study was clearly flawed, but I did omit this point of the conclusion and how flawed the question itself was, thus rendering the rest of the results useless. Because, there is more to education than standardized test scores. I said the full potential of Education Software was not explored, but Kind does a much better job as he goes on and explains,
The answer to that question should be no. This study attempts to show the ineffectiveness of educational technology. Instead it simply reveals the Bush Administration’s tunnel vision on the uses and value of it.
The benefits education technology offers students go beyond merely passing core-curricular tests. With it, students are gaining the technology skills and knowledge they will need to compete in the 21st-century economy. While ensuring that our students are proficient in reading, math, and science is critical to their academic and employment futures, their ability to use technology tools, mine the resources of the Internet, and collaborate virtually with peers around the world are skills that high-paying employers seek as well.
Clearly more needs to be looked at. And we need to stop looking at things solely through the looking glass of NCLB. There is more to life and knowledge than standardized test scores.
Another silver bullet nothing but lead?
It was supposed to be a panacea for students, their parents and teachers alike. Software that was supposed to improve students scores, and make the pipe-dream 100% student proficiency goals of No Child Left Behind a possibility. However, the study that was mandated by Congress back in 2002 on the heels of NCLB, puts the benefits of educational software in doubt, and shows no increase in test scores.
Now, I must state, upfront, much like the daycare study recently, this study, seems terribly flawed on the surface. When they considered “software” what they evaluated just was (I believe too encompassing).
The technology — ranging from snazzy video-game-like programs played on Sony PlayStations to more rigorous drilling exercises used on computers — has been embraced by low-performing schools as an easy way to boost student test scores.
Now, I understand that you want to engage children with “entertaining” forms of software that seems more fun, and hope that keeps their interest longer, however, it also is less likely to have as serious an effect as the drills based programs and more “professional” types of study programs.
A one year study, is also not very solid and their are a whole host of environmental factors that need to be weeded out as well, and many proponents still think there is promise.
Nonetheless, some experts said the software holds promise. Elliot Soloway, professor of educational technology at the University of Michigan, said that teachers need to be better trained and that administrators need to wait more than one year to see results. He said he worried that the study would scare off school districts.
“This is the last thing that we need now,” he said. “It is the poor kids who will suffer, because it is their schools who will not get technology because of this study.”
Regardless, the “magic” is now gone. The expectations of these software products to help reach the lofty (unrealistic) goals of NCLB, now have to be reconsidered. However, I certainly hope that they do not stop funding the software quite yet, as the full potential just doesn’t seem to be looked at here.
NCLB: Unattainable Goals
It seems that there are at least some that are coming to the realization that the goals as they were set forth in the original No Child Left Behind Act, are completely unattainable and unrealistic.
Washington Post (via MSNBC so you don’t need to register)
“There is a zero percent chance that we will ever reach a 100 percent target,” said Robert L. Linn, co-director of the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing at UCLA. “But because the title of the law is so rhetorically brilliant, politicians are afraid to change this completely unrealistic standard. They don’t want to be accused of leaving some children behind.”
So there you have the real problem. Not that people don’t know that the law is flawed nobody wants to be seen as “leaving a child behind” advocate. Much like the Patriot Act, the name keeps lawmakers voting FOR things they know they should vote against.
Foes and supporters alike praise the law for drawing attention to student achievement gaps. The law requires testing for all students in reading and math from grades 3 through 8 and once in high school; it also requires reporting of scores for groups of students including racial and ethnic minorities, those from low-income families, those with limited English skills and those with disabilities who receive special education.
Unlike those that blindly support the law without understanding what it is saying, those that are critical acknowledge that there are certainly good intentions in the law, but how it was constructed, and how you can hope to achieve a 100% rating when you include those that have limited English Skills and those with learning disabilities, is not short of just plain silly. So instead students with learning disorder get shipped around to other districts and such to help some districts (those “disposing” of the students) better “benchmarks” while it provides funds (the school shipping out the student generally pays the other district) to those districts that accept them. That is not education, it is a shell game, and the children are the little pebble being slid around under those shells.
They also much do away with the sanctions that are built into the law. These sanctions, are actually counterproductive, as they take away money from the areas and districts that by definition need it the most, the districts where the children are not faring as well. Does this make sense to anybody? “Your schools aren’t doing well, now go and improve them… with less money to accomplish it.” This is what they are in essence telling these districts.
We can’t allow NCLB to be reauthorized, just because it “sounds good.” It needs to be overhauled and fixed.
Pay to keep your child home sick
It sounds stupid. And it is. They use the excuse that they are “getting tough” on parents that decide to take their children on vacation during the school year. But the fact of the matter is that California schools will start billing families $36 a day when their child is absent. And you can bet that if this holds without much furor from parents, that other States will follow suit and start billing parent’s as well.
I’ve documented my frustration, as well those expressed by Moms from New Jersey to Texas dealing with this issue. As if it is not tough enough trying to content with a sick child, now you have to be concerned more about your child getting sick again, because some parent folds to the pressure and sends their child to school sick. Why? Because the school is pressuring them. Because now California is going to charge them.
It doesn’t take much to figure out what the culprit of this is, and I am sure most of you have already guessed that this is yet another post pointing out why the No Child Left Behind Act should not be reauthorized this year. Now in fairness, the situation is even worse in California, which has a similar attendance requirement for State aid to the schools. But you can be certain even in States where they do not have such laws on the local or State level, since they suffer similar “fines” from NCLB, more will soon follow this lead to help “compensate for lost monies.”
If you have had enough, then please sign the petition created by the Educator Roundtable, or contact your representative. If not, stay tuned, and I am sure I will have more to come.
Update: I did mention in the first line that this program was “touted” as “getting tough” with parents that elect to keep their children out of school for a vacation. What I did not mention that at least at present, the program is “purely voluntary” (the main enforcer here, at least for now is guilt). Hat Tip to Barry for the ommission on my part. I will however still stand by my belief that should this idea not fall apart in California, other States will enact similar measures to recoup losses (whether by vacation or illness).
-
Sponsors
