You have described your problem carefully and well. I do not argue that
you (high school in toto) should be entirely responsible for what a
student learns. That is clearly unreasonable. I argue only for honesty. At
each level -- K through college -- teachers should be able to expect
useful information from the previous level as to the capabilities of
students who leave that level. If students come to me showing that they
have earned A's or B's in high school algebra, yet cannot place-test into
our lowest developmental math course (= h s algebra), what is wrong? This
happens with a significant percentage of new students each semester.
I understand how legal issues cause problems. But my interaction with
elementary and secondary teachers--in Hawaii, Indiana, and Florida--lead
me to believe that high school administrations are at least partially
responsible because of their unwillingness to support teachers who make
fair and appropriate, but unpopular, decisions about student
accomplishments. I could cite many examples where teacher judgements about
student [lack of] accomplishments were overruled by administrators in
order to avoid unpleasantries with parents or school boards.
Unless we educators can find the language to discuss these issues
honestly, I do not see how our CC success rate can increase much above the
current level.
John M. Flanigan <johnf@hawaii.edu> The equation is the final arbiter.
Assistant Professor, Mathematics --Werner Heisenberg
Kapi'olani Community College The scoreboard is the final arbiter.
Honolulu, Hawaii --Bill Walton
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Richard Kern wrote:
> snip
>
> Well, it might just put pressure on the high schools to forgo social
> promotion and give degrees only to those who don't need the remediation.
>
> As a high school teacher I do not take exception to this response. I do
> hope however, that the careful consideration of the complexities and of
> the intractability of several conflicting expectations of our public
> school school system is inherent in this seemingly simple solution.
> Placing the burden of accomplishing this solution on classroom teachers
> without the acceptance of the support and enabling responsibilities of
> governance and management is yet another of the palliative solutions
> which further dresses the emperor with additional accessories to his/her
> wardrobe. An area of particular difficulty is the time honored and
> politically sacrosanct concept of "local control." Of itself, in the
> absence of enforceable guidance, this concept defeats any effort at
> creating consistently interpreted educational standards. Education case
> law in state courts, and to a lesser extent, in federal district courts
> poses additional hurdles-particularly in the area of special education
> law. State and local funding plans provide wide latitude to communities
> for the establishment of standards based on local political
> considerations.
>
> If the nation is truly serious about tackling these issues, I believe
> the bulk of teachers in the public school systems would be supportive.
>
> Richard Kern
> Napaskiak
>
> ****************************************************************************
> * To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
> * To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
> * In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
> * Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
> * Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
> ****************************************************************************
>
****************************************************************************
* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
****************************************************************************