Month: February 2004

Today, our Education College held a public forum on ??No Child Left Behind.?? I attended. I try to keep up on general policy issues, but there are clearly many individuals who have a much more comprehensive view of major issues. I felt the dean’s comments were quite insightful and would like to summarize them here. I cannot claim responsibility for these ideas, nor can I guarantee that I have captured what the dean intended.

I think it would be fair to conclude that the UND Dean of Education is very concerned about the long term of NCLB and feels a responsibility for voicing concerns that others are unwilling or unable to express. Having taken this position, he was quite careful to recognize that NCLB was a law with broad support from both sides of the aisle. Those in positions of preparing teachers must operate in compliance with the provisions of NCLB, but must also use their professional knowledge and skills to make recommendations and raise critical issues in relationship to any legislation that is not truly in the best interest of all learners.

A good part of the presentation concerned an attempt to identify assumptions that seem to form of the basis for NCLB. As you might expect, the point was that these assumptions are either flawed or simplistic.

Assumptions:
1) Teachers are the problem
2) Teacher education programs do a poor job of training teachers
3) Anyone with a major can teach (Note: this assumption violates the assumption (2) that there are few essential pedagogical skills to be learned)
4) All students can perform at grade level
5) The mean class average in any given class will improve each year
6) It is productive to make an example of bad schools
7) Parents pulling their children out of a bad school will improve the quality of that school for others

Why are we in this position? My understanding of the dean’s comments would indicate that he feels the present situation results from a combination of a political agenda on the part of a specific group and the concerns of a different group that there are truly poor schools in some settings (i.e., inequity in student opportunity). The concern is that those making decisions are unable or unwilling to recognize that these two groups have very different long term goals and that these groups fundamentally believe in very different things.

The Dean provided a handout outlining key Provisions and Timeline.

Books cost a lot. Why? It is a bit of a puzzle I wish college students would attempt to understand. Clearly, you can visit any “public” bookstore and most books one would think require the same quality of writing and editorial support as a textbook cost much less. The problem is the resale market and we seem to be caught in a spiral from which we cannot escape.

Given the existing circumstances (the book company must make a certain level of profit to meet costs and pay authors, books are resold through various sources without compensating the company producing the book or the author, local bookstores and used book vendors make money from resales, students pay so much for books they cannot keep their books, book companies employ tactics such as frequent revisions to discourage the use of used books), we are stuck and it is possible no one is being unethical, greedy, etc. Each party seems to want to blame another participant in this cycle, but it takes all parties looking out for their own interests to keep the cycle rolling. If a book company sold a $30 book, would students still resell the book? Would the book store still buy it back? Would that guy still come to my office asking if I wanted to sell the free books I was sent? Would used book companies accept books from all these sources for $15 and try to sell them for $25? You tell me.

See Daily Texan piece that offers an analysis of this situation. Search the same student paper to see some of the replies.

I continually struggle with the reaction against technology in schools. I am less certain of research support for integrating technology using existing ways of assessing student learning than I am of a feeling of certainty that computers and the Internet are simply a basic part of life. I am of the opinion that education works best when it is authentic and sensitive to the realities of daily life.

I watched UND play basketball last night. It was billed as possibly the last ever meeting between the two major North Dakota universities. NDSU has decided to move the entire athletic program to division I and UND has decided not to make the same move. Like most major athletic rivalries this has become a part of life for all in the region. The transition has been the source of great controversy. Changing levels is difficult because of the need to find a suitable conference and the demands for significantly more revenue. NDSU wants to continue playing UND because the in-state rivalry would generate a good deal of money and of the need to find enough opponents to fill out the yearly schedule. UND is not interested — the inequity of playing teams with more scholarships available has to be considered when competing for national titles. Anyway, the presented situation has added a little more zest to what may be the final games between old rivals.

UND does have one Division I sport. For some reason, you are allowed to play division I hockey without having D I teams in other sports. This is a unique situation – UND has won the D-I national championship 7 times (I think) and has been at the top of the national rankings for the past 12 week.

Anyway, back to the common applications of technology. I am at the basketball games with Cindy and I say – “You know what would be really cool? What if during half times (there is both a women’s and men’s game), they put the Internet feed from the hockey game up on the jumbotrons. It would be cool to show some REAL division I sports.” Sure enough, at half time, they start running the feed from the Internet hockey broadcast through the giant stadium video systems. I guess great minds, or at least that “adolescent fan thing” in all of us work in the same way.

In the long run, it might not have been the best idea. UND lost two to Wisconsin and will not be at #1 next week.

Then I am at church this morning and the pastor starts his sermon. For some reason, he hauls in his office computer and a projector system and fires up PowerPoint.

Cindy and I start laughing – people give us funny looks. I starting looking around for some paper and fishing in my pocket for my “field pen” so I can take notes. Then we both automatically begin evaluating his style – needs to learn to use bullets, too many words in each heading, needs to locate the spell checker.

“You know,” Cindy says. “It is interesting to consider PowerPoint in a different setting. I think I actually have a better idea of the points he is trying to make. So many people complain about PowerPoint and we make fun of it, too. It does help make the main ideas easier to pick up.” We better stop whispering.

Let’s see – what was the point? I remember the message was about recognizing your “calling?” “What really matters to you? What are the things you keep coming back to? It is the commitment as much as the success. Follow your passion!”

I agree.

The Wikipedia is an attempt to create a multilingual, free, and accurate open source encyclodedia. Students may enjoy exploring the heavily linked articles. Strange as it may sound – you are invited to contribute.

Stateline.org reports that states are beginning to protest NCLB because the expectations are not matched by suitable resource support. The article focuses on Ohio, but also recognizes concern raised in several other states (including North Dakota).