Re: PHYS-L Digest - 28 Feb 2000 to 29 Feb 2000 (#2000-68)

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@MINDSPRING.COM>]

David Ward wrote:

> Dear Colleagues:
>
> Being a lurker of softer temperament than some on the list, I perhaps should
> not wade into this political discussion. But I am a political junkie with
> a few strong convictions yearning be be expressed:
>
> 2) I confess that my child is enrolled in private school. With far
> fewer funds and facilities
> than the local public schools, the standardized test scores at my
> son's school are far beyond
> the public school's scores. Why hasn't Federal largesse resulted in
> better public school
> performance? (BTW, I am adamantly opposed to school vouchers- I
> fervently believe the government
> ultimately will ruin many fine private schools- not to mention their
> pricing!- should the government
> get involved. As a rule, the government- particularly the Federal
> government- ruins any social
> institution it touches.) As fast as a new private school opens here
> it fills up, as parents willingly
> sacrifice financially in order to flee the failing governmental
> education system.
I won't take on the other issues you raised, because they seem to me
to be pure matters of opinion that we will have to agree to disagree
on. But let me suggest some reasons why your son's school seems to do
better in standardized testing than the local public schools that are
better funded. As you say, money isn't everything, but here is what I
think the difference is. Please correct me if I am wrong.

First, the private school takes only those students that it wants to,
limiting enrollment to only those students it thinks it can serve
(both in number and in student motivation).

Second, the teachers probably have smaller classes than in the public
school and probably have far fewer teacher-hassling rules to deal
with. In other words, they are free to teach and don't have to spend
much of their time on supervisory or activities or paperwork.

Third, and probably the most important, disruptive students or those
who, for whatever reason, are not interested in learning can be
eliminated with relative ease. I have sat in on too many classes
where, no matter how talented or dedicated the teacher is, the class
is governed  by a few disruptive students, whose activities demand
almost all the teacher's time, leaving the rest of the students
standing around hoping to maybe get a bit of education during the
times when the disruptors are taking a breather. And it often is very
difficult to get rid of the disruptive students.

Possibly fourth, (this one is pure conjecture on my part. I obviously
don't even know what school your son attends), in order to enhance
the school's reputation and thus make it easier to get the type of
students it wants, the teachers are encouraged to "teach to the
standardized tests," thus ensuring high scores because the students
have been prepped well. Whether or not this is the case at your
school, it has certainly been done at other schools, both public and
private. It is one of my major objections to the use of standardized
tests for evaluating schools. Their use for evaluating students is
also highly questionable, IMO.

Hugh
--

Hugh Haskell
<mailto://hhaskell@mindspring.com>

Let's face it. People use a Mac because they want to, Windows because they
have to..
******************************************************