“I can’t read.” Imagine the dropped jaws and stunned silence around the office conference table if a co-worker made that admission. Yet no one would blanch if that same co-worker announced, “I can’t do long division.”

While literacy is considered a requisite in most workplaces, basic math skills and science knowledge are considered a specialty, vital to the folks in IT and accounting but not for the rest of the staff. That kind of attitude — found in classrooms, lunchrooms and living rooms across the country — threatens to cripple the United States in global competition.

“There are consequences to a weakening of American independence and leadership in mathematics, the natural sciences and engineering,” warns a recent report to President Bush from the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. “We risk our ability to adapt to change. We risk technological surprise to our economic viability and to the foundations of our country’s security. … Sound education in mathematics across the population is a national interest.”

In the 2007 results on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a standardized test given in schools across the country, 30 percent of U.S. eighth-graders scored below the basic level in math. The failure rate was higher in Georgia, where 36 percent scored below basic.

“Whether filling white-collar or blue-collar positions, employers today want workers with pocket-protector skills — creative problem solvers with strong math and science backgrounds,” says U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings.

At a meeting earlier this month of the Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education, a researcher explained to school leaders from around the state that the problem wasn’t that the U.S. was losing ground in its math achievement. The rest of the world was simply improving faster.

“Other countries are zipping past us,” said Daria Hall, a policy analyst at the Education Trust.

National standards for science and math education are part of the answer. Surely the principles of algebra remain the same whether taught in Boston or Ball Ground, and the chemical properties of water don’t vary across state lines. National standards — backed by testing — would also make it quite clear which states and school districts were failing their students.

But a strong national curriculum would be only half the battle; the other challenge is creating a teaching force capable of teaching to those higher standards. Like many other states, Georgia suffers from a serious shortage of teachers qualified as math and science instructors.

Only 8 percent of students in Georgia public colleges are majoring in engineering, technology or the natural sciences. Within the teaching profession, the numbers are even more stark. A new report by the Governor’s Office of Student Achievement notes that Georgia public colleges produced 3,822 new teachers in 2007. Of that number, only 3.4 percent were trained in math and 2.5 percent were trained in science.

That helps explain why the state graduated only three new high school physics teachers in 2006, up from one in 2005. And that lack of qualified teachers — not just in Georgia, but around the country — in turn helps to explain why only about 15 percent of American high school students earn math or science credit in rigorous Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate programs.

That represents a lot of missed opportunity in a country that adds 100,000 new computer-related jobs a year. As Bill Gates pointed out in his March testimony before the House Committee on Science and Technology, “Only 15,000 students earned bachelor’s degrees in computer science and engineering in 2006, and that number continues to drop.”

As Gates knows better than anyone, the jobs are waiting. It’s up to the education system to make sure the students are ready. And to get more teachers into the classroom qualified to teach those students, Georgia and other states ought to use every tool at their disposal — including scholarships, college loan forgiveness and higher pay for math and science teachers — to persuade more bright students

Source: Atlanta Journal Constitution, USA
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2008/05/16/mathed_0518.html

“Boring” sums up Josh Bullock’s entire high school experience. The 17-year-old got in trouble and recalls spending time in in-school suspension, a practice he said confined him to a small room with no windows where he was supposed to do his schoolwork without any interaction.

He eventually dropped out.

“I’m intelligent,” he said, leaning forward then slumping back again, tapping his foot and moving his hand. He can’t sit still.

Neither can state officials who want to find a way to keep kids in school.

Mississippi’s dropout rate is 24.1 percent - similar to the rest of the nation. On average, only 70 percent of American students will graduate from high school. In Mississippi, only 63 percent will. State officials are determined to reduce the rate by 50 percent in five years.

Gov. Haley Barbour and State Superintendent of Education Hank Bounds agree that high school dropouts pose an economic development hurdle for Mississippi.

“They are not going to have the same opportunities,” Bounds said. “They are more likely to get engaged with illegal activity. Dropouts are more likely to have children who will drop out.”

The economic reality of an undereducated class is staggering.

# Dropouts from the Class of 2007 will cost Mississippi almost $3.9 billion in lost wages and taxes over their lifetime, according to the Alliance for Excellent Education, a national policy and advocacy organization based in Washington.

# Dropouts cost Mississippi $458 million each year, Bounds said. The number comes from money spent on social services, including medical care and prison. It also figures in lost revenue in taxes based on what all those dropouts might have made in income had they completed high school.

# More than 13,000 students drop out every year in Mississippi, according to the Mississippi Department of Education.

# The dropout rate for black and Hispanic students is close to 50 percent nationwide, according to the America’s Promise Alliance, a Washington-based nonprofit collaborative chaired by Alma Powell and founded by her husband, Gen.Colin Powell. In Mississippi, about 57 percent of blacks graduate compared to 71 percent of whites.

# Dropouts earn about $9,200 less per year than high school graduates.

‘Moral obligation’

The state’s new focus has not come about because things are suddenly worse in Mississippi.

“The graduation rate is probably better than it’s ever been,” Bounds said.

And it’s not that Mississippi is worse than any other state. Nationwide, dropout rates are similar to the state’s numbers.

The problem is more complicated than dropping out of high school, though. High school itself just isn’t enough anymore to make it in a global economy based on high technology and ever-evolving transformations.

“Now that we are really understanding this issue, we can understand and see what the real problem looks like,” Bounds said. “I just think I have a moral obligation to make this a focus of the state, to wage this war.”

While politicians, educators, pundits and other adults debate how to solve the dropout crisis, the kids are angry.

“Teachers actually say ‘They don’t pay me enough to do this.’ They don’t want to be there,” said Adam Dearman, 17, who dropped out of Seminary High School earlier this year.

Cameron Clark, 16, wanted to move on with her life. She wants to be an embalmer and plans to attend junior college to meet that goal. Forrest County Agricultural High School already taught her everything it could, she said, and she left school this year.

“I don’t count myself as a dropout. I withdrew from school - I didn’t drop out.”

But Mississippi does count her as a dropout.

High school obsolete

A Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded study that explored why kids drop out found 47 percent of dropouts said classes were not interesting and 69 percent said they were not motivated.

Gates got the shocked attention of the nation’s governors in 2005 when he told a gathering of them that high school was obsolete.

Students are not learning what they need to learn to work for international companies immersed in high technology, he said. The problem goes beyond secondary school - more Americans need to finish college and engage in intellectual challenges to propel the nation into the future.

But before that need can be addressed, more kids must finish 12th grade, experts say. To keep them engaged and make them marketable, a major overhaul is needed. American high schools need updating - call it High School 2.0.

Mississippi is in the middle of a high school redesign. Bounds said it is a move that will make high school relevant.

“There will be lots of strands that look alike - what we do with technology, what we teach teachers to counsel students and explain opportunities,” Bounds said.

Some things will vary for each school district. Schools are different sizes and different regions in the state have their own needs. For example, Lamar County schools are incorporating economics into the curriculum at every level to help students make better choices.

The experts

Part of the redesign has to include more guidance for students, even building it into the required curriculum, national experts say.

Effective comprehensive guidance has three components, said Norman Gysbers, an expert in the field and a professor at the University of Missouri.

First, the curriculum should include knowledge about career opportunities. Second, the school should work with each student and his parents to develop a personal plan of study in middle school. Third, the school should provide special help when it’s needed on a short-term basis.

“The focus is on a living plan initiated in high school,” Gysbers said.

An example is Navigation 101, a program in the state of Washington that has had great success. A program of comprehensive guidance should be an ongoing quest, not a one-time determination, Gysbers said.

“Plans change,” he said. Guidance should never lock students into only one option they can’t escape. Kids have to feel as if school matters in their life and actually makes a difference, Gysbers said.

“If students feel connected to school, they are going to do better,” he said.

Different programs and curricula are available based on the research of Gysbers and others who have examined the need for decades. An example is the extensive yet intuitive Career Choices course used in many schools across the nation, but not in Mississippi because strict state guidelines don’t leave room for a new subject. Career Choices incorporates English and math skills with “life planning.” That program promotes the idea of a 10-year plan starting around eighth grade with dreams and visions and morphing into a strategy for the next phase of learning after high school. By contrast, many existing programs just concentrate on getting through the four years of high school.

The challenge is getting comprehensive guidance implemented into the curriculum.

“If we have to concentrate on basics, how do we get extras in?” Gysbers asked. He said that is a common concern of school administrators already loaded with heavy state and federal requirements.

Ideally, the developmental process begins in elementary school.

“It’s really too late by high school,” Gysbers said. “That kind of effort takes a lot of time and resources.”

Other experts agree. It takes parents as well as teachers and schools that care about the individual kid.

“When you connect a student to an adult, it builds relationships, it helps him build goals,” said Gene Bottoms of Atlanta, senior vice president of Southern Regional Education Board and founding director of High Schools That Work.

Any dropout prevention plan has to be more than about holding more students in school, but at the same time that is one of the obstacles.

“You can’t do much to get them engaged if they aren’t in school,” Bottoms said.

“We have a very high failure rate in grade nine,” he said, adding that part of this is because of a high student-to-teacher ratio and part of it is because it’s often teachers with the least experience who teach freshmen high school classes.

The more experienced teachers often teach Advanced Placement classes to smaller classes in higher grades. Bottoms wants to turn the whole system around.

He thinks one reason for the dropout rate and the ninth-grade failures is because current high school requirements load up on academics in the ninth grade. Some students have to take two math classes, for example. One is remedial if their math scores are too low and one is required for them not to get left behind.

Keeping boys interested is another large problem, Bottoms said.

“We’re losing male students at a higher rate than young ladies,” he said.

Schools need to change the experience for teenagers. In the ninth grade, there should a practical class with hands-on applications, either in fine arts or technology that allows kids to get up out of their seats and interact as they put academic skills to work. That’s one idea.

Another idea Bottoms has is to offer catch-up classes so students have another opportunity to pick up a required class without becoming so hopelessly behind they don’t choose to stay.

Hattiesburg High is considering something along these lines with online courses that could meet the need.

“We have got to redesign the curriculum in ninth grade,” Bottoms said. “Do less tracking and sorting. Enroll more kids in AP classes. Don’t wait until 11th grade to start tech classes. Improving the high school completion rate is as much about changing adult behavior as it is about changing student behavior.”

Bottoms describes a high school in San Antonio, Texas, that had bullet holes in the walls and looked and felt like a prison. The school administrators eventually turned to Boys Town, a Nebraska-based nonprofit organization, for help.

“They did a 180-degree turnaround,” Bottoms said. The difference? Treating the students as individuals.

“They don’t sense adults respect them,” Bottoms said.

Schools that want to change need a district that supports them. Mississippi’s dropout prevention program is a step in the right direction, Bottoms said.

“Hank (Bounds) has a handle on things. Accountability has to give as much importance to completion as to achievement.”

Where are parents?

A lack of parental involvement is at the root of many dropout stories.

“Parents do not get involved,” Bottoms said. “And there’s not very good mechanisms for poor parents to get involved. Better-off parents who are educated know how to work the system.”

It’s not only one thing that needs fixing. It’s many things. Bottoms suggests leadership training for principals and teachers to start.

“This will cost some money,” Bottoms said. “Look at your prison costs. You are either going to make your investment now or pay for it later.”

Josh Bullock, meanwhile, is still angry but not unmotivated. The former Oak Grove student is getting his GED, looking for a part-time job and planning to attend junior college to study computer science, maybe something in game design.

School just got in the way of his plans.

Source: Hattiesburg American, MS
http://tinyurl.com/6mot7g

Schools are responding positively to the recommended phonics method of teaching reading, suggests a snapshot survey by inspectors.

Ofsted inspectors say there is a “virtuous circle” of improved reading skills and higher expectations.

The report from inspectors also concluded that children were enjoying phonics lessons.

This survey tested the progress of the Rose Review of reading, which called for a more systematic use of phonics.

‘Raised expectations’

Ofsted inspectors found schools using the recommended phonics method had “raised their expectations of how quickly and well children could learn to read and write”.

“Teachers have been ’surprised by the joy’ shown by children as they master phonic skills,” says the report.

The principle behind phonics is that children learn the sounds of letters and of combinations of letters and use them to decode words.

The report, based on visits to 20 schools and responses from a further 43, found that teachers were putting into practice the recommendations for improving the teaching of reading.

In 2005, the government-commissioned review of reading by Sir Jim Rose called for “relatively short, discrete sessions, designed to progress from simple elements to the more complex aspects of phonic knowledge”.

Phonics had already been taught in many primary schools, but the Rose Review emphasised the need for a rigorous and systematic use of from the earliest years.

And this snapshot survey shows that in 16 of the 20 schools visited such sessions of teaching phonics were taking place every day.

It also found that 19 of these schools had adopted a systematic approach to phonics teaching.

However, it also found that this was not an easy subject to explain to parents.

Meetings for parents about phonics were poorly attended and teachers said there were difficulties in “conveying the subtleties of the programme”.

Source: BBC News, UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7391948.stm

America’s increased focus on standardized test scores has meant more widespread use of drugs for ADHD—whether kids need ’em or not

Over the past few weeks, many thousands of Georgia elementary and middle school students sharpened their No. 2 pencils and waited for the teacher’s signal to turn over their answer sheets and hunker down to business on the Georgia Criterion Reference Test. Most did so without being under the influence of drugs, but some had been “juiced” for the test well in advance, perhaps even months or years in advance, through the use of drugs prescribed to treat attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD).

Jennifer Fox, author of Your Child’s Strengths: Discover Them, Develop Them, Use Them, has seen the phenomenon herself. Fox, who is president of The Purnell School, a boarding school in New Jersey, describes a student she calls “Kate” (not her real name) who was extremely effervescent. She smiled a lot. She laughed a lot. She played a lot, even in class. Teachers complained that she wasn’t focused, so her parents had her put on a drug that was supposed to treat ADHD, and she lost that bubbly personality. It was as if the life “had been sucked out of her.”

“Kids are rushed to get diagnosed as learning-disabled so they can get extra time on tests and they can get put on drugs to perform better on tests,” says Fox, who is scheduled to sign her book at Wordsmiths in Decatur on Wednesday, April 30. “What we have in this country is a system that puts kids on drugs and gets them hooked on drugs for the rest of their lives.”

Though Fox acknowledges that there are children who definitely need medication, the problem, as she sees it, is an unhealthy focus on standardized test scores—a focus that parents often share with teachers, one that puts performance ahead of a child’s health and well-being.

“The schools are failing. The standardized tests are failing. And we are putting kids on drugs to try to overcome that,” she says. “That, to me, is like child abuse in a way.”

Fox points out that “Kate” had a strong suit—that bubbly personality that the drug erased. She says that she envisioned Kate someday working in a profession that required that kind of energy and vivaciousness. But since that strength was drugged out of her, who knows if Kate will ever make the most of the gift that she naturally had? Though Fox admits that there are kids who need medication to treat ADHD and other disorders, she adds, “I believe that it may be that these drugs are getting rid of the very thing that is best about these kids, something unique that the world needs.”

“Before You Take That Pill”

In his book Before You Take That Pill: Why The Drug Industry May Be Bad For Your Health, which hit bookstores in March, J. Douglas Bremner, a professor of psychiatry at the Emory University School of Medicine, explains that although its exact causes are not known, some scientists think that ADHD is related to alterations in the brain chemical dopamine, which modulates attention. Nonetheless, he views with skepticism the popularity of a plethora of stimulants used to treat ADHD, including Ritalin, Adderall and, a slow-release version of Ritalin, Concerta.

In his book, Bremner writes: “An entire generation of kids who cannot pay attention is being diagnosed more and more frequently (and sometimes inaccurately) with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD. It seems strange that it has been increasing so dramatically over the past few years. Certainly in the last generation many children with concentration problems were simply labeled unintelligent or ‘problem kids.’ However, with current competition for children to excel in school having reached such a fever pitch, it is no longer acceptable to let children fall behind. The elimination of recess, the lengthening of the school year, and the insistence that children remain rigidly fixed in their chairs without making a peep flies in the face of the realities of normal childhood.”

Bremner cites a three-fold increase in Ritalin prescriptions in the four years between 1991—which just happens to be the year that the U.S. Congress agreed that an ADHD diagnosis should qualify children for extra time on tests—and 1994. He goes on to point out that fully 10 percent of boys in America are prescribed some kind of stimulant for ADHD or other mental conditions.

On a recent weekday morning, Bremner, a soft-spoken man with a reserved demeanor, balances a laptop across his knees at a coffee shop, accepts an offered cheese cracker and explains his skepticism: “Do all of the kids who are taking Ritalin meet the requirements for ADHD? Probably not.”

There are reasons, not necessarily medical, that children might be prescribed a drug for ADHD, Bremner says. It may be that their parents want them to perform better in school, and those parents can pressure a doctor who is already pressured by pharmaceutical sales reps to write the prescription. It may also be the case that the child’s tendency to, well, be a child, is a problem.

“What we do know about these drugs and playfulness,” he says, “is that they tend to decrease playfulness.”

But how and why the drugs get prescribed isn’t the concern of the drug companies. The job of drug companies, he says, is not to make people well, but to sell drugs, and it’s a job that they do very, very well. Children, in particular, can provide a business boon, because once they’re on a drug, at what point is it OK to take them off? “Before You Take That Pill,” explores the risks of a wide range of drugs—not just those prescribed to children—and begins with the startling revelation that “Now, more than half of all Americans are taking a prescription drugs.”

All of the amphetamine-like stimulants used to treat ADHD, writes Bremner, act as appetite suppressants, and therefore may impede a child’s growth. They also “have been linked to approximately a doubling of heart-related deaths in children.” Such deaths are still rare, however. What he would like to see, Bremner says, is a little more skepticism on the part of Americans toward the extremely profitable drug companies.

Watching cartoons and drug commercials

Don’t count on the current crop of kids to be the ones to develop that skepticism. Rick McDevitt, executive director of the Georgia Advocacy for Children, says that drug use to solve problems has become an assumed part of American life, beginning when children are plopped in front of a television, where they view one pharmaceutical commercial after another. At school, he says, they are given to understand that if they do not do well on standardized tests, there might be something wrong with them that a drug can fix. Teachers tell parents their child isn’t focused and that they should seek help, and “help” turns out to be “take these pills.”

“The drugging of kids has become commonplace, the drug is a means of social control and the schools have become agents of that social control,” McDevitt says. “It’s about the test scores, it’s not about solving the problems at the source. The kids take the drugs, the test scores are better, and everyone says ‘They’re doing better.’ They’re not doing better. They are on drugs.”

Local child psychologist Sunaina Jain was listening to the radio recently when she happened upon a on a show on which people were talking about “our child-obsessed society.”

“I thought ‘What child-obsessed society?’ We don’t even like children in this society,” she says. “We do everything we can to make them become adults quickly.”

Jain, who has been in practice since before Ritalin hit the market in the late 1980s, says that the enormous use of drugs to treat ADHD is one more symptom of the need to make children become grown-ups. Although such drugs have helped many children, she says there is little doubt that they are over-prescribed. ADHD, she explains, affects about one boy in15 and girl in 25, but the number of prescriptions would seem to suggest that ADHD is epidemic in the United States.

“Part of the problem is parents who are looking for a way to improve their children’s test scores,” says Jain. “For these parents, these are ‘showcase’ children—their children’s success reflects on them. They want success, they want good grades, and if that can be obtained by popping a pill, that is what they do. There are also kids whose parents just don’t have time to pick them up from school and help them with their homework.”

The tendency to resort to drugs, she says, cuts through all economic classes. Like Fox, Bremner, and McDevitt, she points to a culture that makes it tough to be a kid. It’s a problem that affects the poor and the rich, though in different ways.

“If you have nanny-raised kids, you have the same problem that you have with poor, disadvantaged kids. With a nanny, they are not getting what they would from parents—they don’t learn how to connect with people,” Jain says. “Our strongest need is to connect with other human beings, and if you don’t learn how to do that, that’s a problem.”

The complaint she hears most from parents and teachers goes a long way in explaining what’s going on: “I don’t have time for this.”

The view of childhood as a time when competition makes or breaks one, as a screening process for winners and losers that needs to be gotten out of the way in time to join the adult world, is a view that distorts the children. Jain says the situation of children in America has steadily deteriorated since the 1980s. She believes that as a country, we have shifted away from seeing childhood as “practice” for adulthood and more as the game itself.

“But you know, you need practice to be good at the game,” she says. “A kid needs a coach, someone to say, ‘this is how you hold the bat.’ Then, after thousands of practices, one day they’re ready to go out into the world, to the game. A drug can’t tell them how to hold the bat.”

Source: Sunday Paper, GA
http://tinyurl.com/3o777x

One train leaves Station A at 6 p.m. traveling at 40 miles per hour toward Station B. A second train leaves Station B at 7 p.m. traveling on parallel tracks at 50 m.p.h. toward Station A. The stations are 400 miles apart. When do the trains pass each other?

Entranced, perhaps, by those infamous hypothetical trains, many educators in recent years have incorporated more and more examples from the real world to teach abstract concepts. The idea is that making math more relevant makes it easier to learn.

That idea may be wrong, if researchers at Ohio State University are correct. An experiment by the researchers suggests that it might be better to let the apples, oranges and locomotives stay in the real world and, in the classroom, to focus on abstract equations, in this case 40 (t + 1) = 400 - 50t, where t is the travel time in hours of the second train. (The answer is below.)

“The motivation behind this research was to examine a very widespread belief about the teaching of mathematics, namely that teaching students multiple concrete examples will benefit learning,” said Jennifer A. Kaminski, a research scientist at the Center for Cognitive Science at Ohio State. “It was really just that, a belief.”

Dr. Kaminski and her colleagues Vladimir M. Sloutsky and Andrew F. Heckler did something relatively rare in education research: they performed a randomized, controlled experiment. Their results appear in Friday’s issue of the journal Science.

Though the experiment tested college students, the researchers suggested that their findings might also be true for math education in elementary through high school, the subject of decades of debates about the best teaching methods.

In the experiment, the college students learned a simple but unfamiliar mathematical system, essentially a set of rules. Some learned the system through purely abstract symbols, and others learned it through concrete examples like combining liquids in measuring cups and tennis balls in a container.

Then the students were tested on a different situation — what they were told was a children’s game — that used the same math. “We told students you can use the knowledge you just acquired to figure out these rules of the game,” Dr. Kaminski said.

The students who learned the math abstractly did well with figuring out the rules of the game. Those who had learned through examples using measuring cups or tennis balls performed little better than might be expected if they were simply guessing. Students who were presented the abstract symbols after the concrete examples did better than those who learned only through cups or balls, but not as well as those who learned only the abstract symbols.

Dr. Kaminski said even the effectiveness of using blocks and other “manipulatives,” which have become more pervasive in preschool and kindergarten, remained untested. It has not been shown that lessons in which children learn to count by using blocks translate to a better understanding of numbers than a more abstract approach would have achieved.

The Ohio State researchers have begun new experiments with elementary school students.

Other mathematicians called the findings interesting but warned against overgeneralizing. “One size can’t fit all,” said Douglas H. Clements, a professor of learning and instruction at the University of Buffalo. “That’s not denying what these guys have found, whatsoever.”

Some children need manipulatives to learn math basics, Dr. Clements said, but only as a starting point.

“It’s a fascinating article,” said David Bressoud, a professor of mathematics at Macalester College in St. Paul and president-elect of the Mathematical Association of America. “In some respects, it’s not too surprising.”

As for the answer to the math problem at the top of this article, the two trains pass each other at 11 p.m. at the midway point between Stations A and B. Or, using the abstract approach, t = 4.

Source: New York Times, United States
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/science/25math.html?ref=education

The kiwi classroom of the future could look a little like this, if American educationalist Dr Leonard Sax has any influence.

A room is filled with 7-year-old boys, none of whom is sitting - in fact there are no chairs on offer.

There is noise, cooler light and the temperature has been turned down. This, says Sax, is the environment in which boys learn best.

The Maryland-based executive director of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education, is in New Zealand next month to speak at several single sex schools including Auckland’s St Cuthbert’s College and Dilworth School, and at Iona College, Lindisfarne College and Woodford House, Hawke’s Bay.

Citing research from Harvard Medical School, the US National Institute of Health and various European studies, Sax argues that no one-size-fits-all education programme can be successfully applied across the sex divide, that both girls and boys will flourish in environments tailored to their gender-specific requirements.

Traditional arguments for sex-segregated schools are often based broadly on the management of teenage hormones. The theory was there would be less distraction for everyone if the girls and boys were educated separately. But hormones have no part in today’s rationale for single-sex classes.

“There’s been a pretty fundamental shift in the way people think about single-sex education, at least in North America, over the last 20 years or so,” says Sax. “That’s what’s new: the idea that the single-sex format may be most beneficial for children who are 5, 6, 7 years old. This is the empirical finding.”

Of the 367 public schools in the US that have adopted the single-sex format in the past few years, Sax says that all but about 20 are primary schools.

“[I’m] not saying that there are not benefits at the high school level; there certainly are. But the benefits in the early primary years are much greater.”

He says advanced imaging techniques have offered neuroscientists fresh insights into brain development.

“When you compare a six-year-old girl with a six-year-old boy, you find quite staggering differences in the brain,” says Sax.

Regions of the brain develop in a different sequence in the genders, he says.

The areas of the brain associated with language and fine motor skills mature about six years earlier in girls than boys. The areas of the brain associated with maths and geometry mature about four years earlier in boys than girls. This finding may help explain why some girls find maths “hard”, he says, while some boys think poetry is for “sissies”.

According to Sax, understanding and exploiting these nuances allow educators to adapt lessons and classrooms to suit the all-girl or all-boy population.

One “very reliable difference” between 6-year-old boys and 6-year-old girls is in their ability to sit still and be quiet. The average girl can sit still for longer than the average boy, with implications for the duration of lessons and the structure of the day, says Sax. Girls can have longer, uninterrupted classes, but boys will do best with 20-minute lessons followed by a run around outside.

Some US schools have taken this finding a step further. At both Cunningham School for Excellence, Iowa, and Foley Intermediate, Alabama, sitting is optional in the all-boys classes. And Chicago’s Hardey Prep doesn’t even supply chairs to their 6 and 7-year-old boys.

“As one teacher said to me: when that boy sits down his brain shuts off,” says Sax. “So the boys stand for many of the classes.

“In the mixed classroom, every choice you make is going to advantage the girls at the expense of boys or advantage the boys at the expense of girls,” he says. “The lack of awareness of gender differences often has the unintended consequence of disadvantaging both the girls and the boys.”

But Sax’s theories relate not only to the type of lesson, but to the environment the students work best in.

He says studies of young people of normal weight have shown that the ideal room temperature for boys to learn is about 20C; for girls it’s about 3 degrees higher. With classroom thermostats typically set at somewhere between 21C and 22C, Sax says that both genders will be outside their ideal comfort zone.

Evidence that tailoring the learning experience rather than simply splitting up boys and girls enhances academic performance is mounting, with research showing improved grades and test results in both sexes.

Sax advocates the introduction of single-sex classes into co-ed schools as some New Zealand schools are already doing. In Auckland’s Mt Albert Grammar, most of the junior classes are gender segregated while Long Bay College in Auckland last year introduced single-sex classes.

Sax says he wasn’t always a devotee of single-sex education, believing that “we live in a co-ed world… schools should prepare kids for the real world”. And there are still many critics of the single-sex education model, notably the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Organisation for Women, who see it as a discriminatory anachronism. Under the old model that prevailed in the US until around the 1960s, boys’ schools typically received the bulk of the resources while girls’ schools made do with their leftovers and hand-me-downs.

But Sax has no intention of returning to what he describes as “the bad old days”. He was educated in an era when “they pushed girls and boys into pink and blue cubby holes” - boys had compulsory woodwork, girls had home economics. The new world order he favours aims to “expand educational horizons, to get more girls excited about computer science and physics and engineering - and to get more boys excited about art and poetry and creative writing and foreign languages“.

“The irony is that we’ve had roughly three decades throughout the English-speaking world of ignoring gender, pretending that gender doesn’t matter,” he says.

“There are substantially fewer young women studying computer science, physics and engineering than there were 20 years ago - and fewer men who regard creative writing, or writing at all, as something that boys do. So we’ve ignored gender and the result of ignoring gender has been not to eliminate gender stereotypes; it has been a hardening of gender stereotypes.”

New Zealand Herald, New Zealand
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=35&objectid=10505122

Some children are being “left behind,” but it isn’t schools leaving them there. And yet many educators, politicians and other people with good intentions continue to push schools to do more, sounding the alarm that American children are at a global disadvantage when it comes to education. I’m not sold on the solution — which is more schooling, not simply more rigorous academics. I’m not even sure I agree on what the problem is.

In a Sunday story by Howard Buck, Evergreen Public Schools Superintendent John Deeder said schools should do more. When asked what he would do if he could wave a magic wand and reform education, Deeder said, among other things, that the school day should go from six to seven hours and the school year should go from 180 to 210 days — going beyond many Asian countries’ 200 days. Teachers should work 240 days per year, Deeder says, with 30 of them dedicated to training and curriculum development. He would make full-day kindergarten mandatory and preschool available to all 3- and 4-year-olds in the state — a goal many administrators, lawmakers and Gov. Chris Gregoire share.

But putting more hours in a day, more days in a year and two or three more years of a child’s formative years in the hands of the government is not the way to get parents more involved. As Deeder told Buck and reiterated to me Monday, “We can’t legislate to people how to be parents, but I wish we could get across to them the correlation between their involvement and their kids’ success.”

Bingo.

Parent involvement in their children’s education is directly correlated to kids’ success. Research backs up this common sense, but for some reason it isn’t touching down in the right way with parents or educrats. If more parents were more involved, richer and more rigorous school time would be easier to achieve; it would be unnecessary for schools to take on almost-full-time parenting duties and cradle-to-grave schooling.

A child can succeed when the odds are against her. And schools need to do all they can to connect students to learning that prepares them for the outside world. But getting parents involved is where societal energy is desperately needed. Even if you add more years, more days and more hours to a school year, without supportive home environments and active parenting, kids will fall behind.

Blame those most responsible

What can schools do? Keep trying to engage students, for sure. Tests are good, too, so we can see if students are learning. But schools must also quit bearing the brunt when students fall short. It isn’t typically a school’s fault when a child fails. That blame goes to students themselves and their families.

Taking on more hours, days and years of a child’s upbringing not only sets up schools for more public floggings, it is at cross purposes with inspiring involved parenting. Like many welfare programs, when the government offers more help, some stop helping themselves.

I asked Deeder if he worried that taking on even more would backfire, creating a public that expects schools, rather than parents, to be kids’ primary educators. His answer: “Here’s where I come from on every decision I think about: What is best for kids? For everything you do there’s an unintended consequence.” More school time, he says, is better for kids. It would be better than the day care kids get now, he added. And if some people adopt the attitude I fear, he says that’s too bad.

Putting kids first is good policy, and I admire Deeder’s passion. But in the long run, kids will suffer in a system that usurps, rather than challenges, parental responsibilities.

We can’t legislate how to parent. But when it comes to academics, we should expect and can require more from parents. They are the ones leaving children behind. They hold the keys to student success.

Source: The Columbian, WA
http://tinyurl.com/6p4ah2

In 2006, President Bush named a group to advise on improving U.S. mathematics education. Now, the experts say existing research offers few answers.

This is the VOA Special English Education Report.

A committee has released its final report on ways to improve math education for American students. President Bush created the National Mathematics Advisory Panel two years ago.

The panel examined thousands of reports, along with survey results from more than seven hundred algebra teachers. Yet the report, released last month, is short on detailed advice. It says existing research does not show just what knowledge or skills are needed for effective math teaching. The solution? More research.

The report does say basic math skills must be taught completely in the early years of school. Children should be able to add and subtract in the third grade. By the end of fifth grade, they should be able to multiply and divide.

The report says a major goal for kindergarten through eighth grade should be understanding fractions. These skills are needed for algebra. Yet, the report says, at the present time they seem to be severely underdeveloped in American students.

Schools are urged to prepare more students to take algebra by the eighth grade.

Many people think math success depends largely on natural talent or ability; the experts say it depends on effort. Studies have shown that children improve in math when they believe that their efforts to learn make them “smarter.”

The report also calls for strengthening the math preparation of elementary and middle school teachers. And it urges publishers to shorten math textbooks, which are often up to a thousand pages long. The panel said math books are much smaller in many nations where students do better in math than American children.

Publishers say American textbooks have to meet the goals of different states for what should be taught in each grade.

The report also calls for more research on the effects of using calculators. Many algebra teachers expressed concern about their use in the lower grades.

And the report says gifted students who can move through the material much faster than others should be permitted to do so.

The math panel says the educational system needs major changes. If not, it warns that the United States will lose the mathematical leadership it possessed during most of the twentieth century. (…)

Source: Voice of America
http://www.voanews.com/specialenglish/2008-04-09-voa2.cfm

Perhaps the government confused fantasy with reality the day it endorsed Brain Gym

Man the lifeboats. The idiots are winning. Last week I watched, open-mouthed, a Newsnight piece on the spread of “Brain Gym” in British schools. I’d read about Brain Gym before - a few years back, in Ben Goldacre’s excellent Bad Science column for this newspaper - but seeing it in action really twisted my rage dial.

Brain Gym, y’see, is an “educational kinesiology” programme designed to improve kiddywink performance. It’s essentially a series of simple exercises lumbered with names that make you want to steer a barbed wire bus into its creator’s face. One manoeuvre, in which you massage the muscles round the jaw, is called the “energy yawn”. Another involves activating your “brain buttons” by forming a “C” shape with one hand and pressing it either side of the collarbone while simultaneously touching your stomach with the other hand.

Throughout the report I was grinding my teeth and shaking my head - a movement I call a “dismay churn”. Not because of the sickening cutesy-poo language, nor because I’m opposed to the nation’s kids being forced to exercise (make them box at gunpoint if you want) but because I care about the difference between fantasy and reality, both of which are great in isolation, but, like chalk and cheese or church and state, are best kept separate.

Confuse fantasy with reality and you might find yourself doing crazy things, like trying to wave hello to Ian Beale each time you see him on the telly, or buying homeopathic remedies - both of which are equally boneheaded pursuits. (Incidentally, if anyone disagrees with this assessment and wants to write in defending homeopathy, please address your letters to myself c/o the Kingdom of Narnia.)

Perhaps the Department for Children, Schools and Families confused fantasy with reality the day it endorsed Brain Gym. Because while Brain Gym’s coochy-coo exercises may well be fun or relaxing, what they’re definitely good at is increasing the flow of bullshit into children’s heads.

For instance, according to the Brain Gym teacher’s manual, performing the “brain button” exercise increases the flow of “electromagnetic energy” and helps the brain send messages from the right hemisphere to the left. Brain Gym can also “connect the circuits of the brain”, “clear blockages” and activate “emotional centering”. Other Brain Gym material contains the startling claim that “all liquids [other than water] are processed in the body as food, and do not serve the body’s water needs … processed foods do not contain water.”

All of which sounds like hooey to me. And also to the British Neuroscience Association, the Physiological Society and the charity Sense About Science, who have written to every local education authority in the land to complain about Brain Gym’s misrepresentation of, um, reality.

Look at the accredited practitioners of the art: top of their list of qualified Brain Gym “instructor/consultants” is a woman who is apparently also a “chiropractor for humans and animals”. That’s nothing: I read tarot cards for fish.

And check out the linked bookshop, Body Balance Books. Alongside Brain Gym guides and wallcharts, it stocks titles such as Awakening the Child Heart and Resonance Kinesiology, which, apparently, “holds information on how to move forward with truth, without the overlays of people’s beliefs and ideas about what is best for themselves and others”. Huh?

If we mistrust the real world so much that we’re prepared to fill the next generation’s heads with a load of gibbering crap about “brain buttons”, why stop there? Why not spice up maths by telling kids the number five was born in Greece and invented biscuits? Replace history lessons with screenings of the Star Wars trilogy? Teach them how to whistle in French? Let’s just issue the kids with blinkers.

Because we, the adults, don’t just gleefully pull the wool over our own eyes - we knit permanent blindfolds. We’ve decided we hate facts. Hate, hate, hate them. Everywhere you look, we’re down on our knees, gleefully lapping up neckful after neckful of steaming, cloddish bullshit in all its forms. From crackpot conspiracy theories to fairytale nutritional advice, from alternative medicine to energy yawns - we just can’t get enough of that musky, mudlike taste. Brain Gym is just one small tile in an immense and frightening mosaic of fantasy.

Still, that’s just my opinion. Lots of people clearly think Brain Gym is worthwhile, or they wouldn’t be prepared to pay through the nose for it. If you’re one of them, here’s an exciting new kinesiological exercise that should dramatically increase your self-awareness - and I’m giving it away free of charge. Ready? OK. Curl the fingers of your right hand inward, meeting the thumb to form a circle. Jerk it rhythmically up and down in front of your face. Repeat for six hours. Then piss off.

Source: Guardian Unlimited, UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/07/education

To teach children how to play the piano, you have to teach them the basics of music - keys, notes, chords, melody, and harmony. With these tools learned, your kids can experience the joy and sense of accomplishment from playing their favorite songs on the piano.

To most of us, driving a car seems effortlessness. Our eyes, hands, and feet work together seamlessly, automatically, without conscious thought. But we first had to learn the basics of driving when we were young. Remember back to your father’s driving lessons? He taught you how to turn the steering wheel, where the gas and brake pedal was, how to stay in your lane, turn signals and stop signs, use of mirrors, keeping to speed limits, looking ahead. All these basics took time and practice to learn. Now, those of us who have been driving for many years, take these basics for granted. We drive “automatically” and with skill.

The same process applies to another skill—reading. Read a book or a newspaper and it seems effortless. Yet such skill comes from constant use, from constant practice of basic skills learned at an early age.

The results were inevitable - half the nation’s high-school grads cannot read a bus schedule. Businesses lose $40 billion a year for remedial reading classes for new employees fresh from high school. Thirty percent of Americans functionally illiterate. The child who is taught phonics is able to read thousands of words in a few semesters. The “whole-word” child-victim is able to “recognize” only a few hundred words. Thus we have the crash in reading skills, the dumbing-down of our kids, the millions of frustrated teens who drop out of school, turn to crime, and end up in prison because they can’t get a decent job.

Yet, in the face of such failure, such disaster for our children, the educrats turn a blind eye and a deaf ear. In the face of reality - massive denial and rationalization.

Buy why? What do they gain? There is always a reason for irrational behavior, and the educrats have many.

Educrats think phonics believers are extremist Christian Rightists or educational simpletons unable to understand the “complexity” of the educrats’ so-called learning theories. Yet, let reality be the judge. The children who learn phonics read far quicker and better than the “whole-word” readers. And the “complexity” educrats proclaim is a self-serving fantasy of their making, designed to ward off competition. Educrats think they are gurus with special skills no parent can possess. Rather, they are education buffoons who don’t know how to teach phonics to your kids any longer, or don’t want to bother.

Educrats claim that phonics and rules will turn kids off to the joy of reading. Just the opposite is true - when a “whole-language” victim-child tries to read the many words he was not taught to “recognize,” he will give up in frustration. His frustration will end his reading and his ‘joy” in reading. The phonics-trained child can read any word and any book, and the joy of reading follows from his skills.

This learning of basic skills need not be a struggle. What turns kids off? The insufferable boredom, the mediocrity of the educrats’ teaching methods, unchanged for 50 years.

Children learn the alphabet and letter sounds with delight at home. Sesame Street, “Hooked on Phonics,” the Internet, learning channels on cable TV, creative reading books especially made for kids by learning entrepreneurs can make learning letters and sounds a delight.

Phonics and drills are a drudge in government schools because educrats don’t have the time, skill, desire, or imagination to make them otherwise. Rather than blame themselves or their government-run system for failure, they blame everyone else. They now claim it is the child’s fault (he has attention-deficit disorder!), the parents’ fault (they don’t get “involved!”), or “society’s” fault (racism or “not enough money for the schools!”).

Educrats also say that drills and basics, tests and standards, are “unfair” to kids, cause them stress, and threaten their self-esteem. Just the opposite is true - real self-esteem comes from achievement, not from a teacher’s hot-air, feel-good compliments. Achievement needs tasks, content, ever-increasing complex skills children learn with guided effort. Joy, not stress, is the result of achievement. And what is more important than for children to learn that rewards come from effort and perseverence? Educrats hate phonics and true reading skills because their teacher colleges don’t train them in the phonics method. Teachers who are not taught the phonics method will naturally feel inadequate to teach phonics to children. It is not the teachers’ fault. Rather, the fault lies with educrats, teacher colleges, and educational theorists who have contempt for phonics.

The “whole-language” reading method, in contrast, is allegedly “student-centered,” meaning that kids get to sit around in circles and talk about their feelings rather than learn to actually read. With “whole-language” reading, educrats can claim there are no standards, no way to test reading skills and achievement. There are few rigorous tests, low standards, and no failing grades.

“Whole-language” reading therefore achieves the educrats’ ultimate goal - if there are no standards or objectivity, no one can blame them, no one can question them, no one can hold them accountable for their failure to teach our children to read. The educrats don’t want to grade their students’ performance because it allegedly hurts the kids “self-esteem.” I believe this attitude is merely a projection of the educrat’s primal fears—they do not want parents judging their performance and holding them accountable for teaching their kids to read. The educrats don’t want their fragile self-esteem threatened by angry parents who expect public schools to do one simple thing—teach their kids to read.

Government schools are designed to assuage the educrats’ terror at being judged by parents, and being forced to compete in a free-market education system. Government (public) schools’ ultimate purpose is to be a full-employment program for educrats - to give them guaranteed jobs without accountability to parents. It is to placate these fearful educrats that our government schools dumb-down our children and turn them into illiterates with bleak futures.

So what can you, as a concerned parent, do to protect your child? As long as public schools are run by government and their educrats, they will never change. In my book, Public Schools, Public Menace, I tell parents about wonderful new education alternatives to public schools, such as accredited, low-cost internet private schools. Parents, I urge you to look into these alternatives, before your children are irreparably harmed by public-school whole-language, anti-phonics, “reading” instruction.

Source: NewsByUs, ID
http://newsbyus.com/index.php/article/162