Serve the Kids—The Opportunity for Improved Education Performance

Paul Richardson, March 2010

The Problems with Colorado Education

 Achievement is abysmal when compared to national and especially, international standards.

o The Proficiency Illusion (2007), Colorado NCLB cut scores are on average the lowest for
both reading and math among the 26 states studied. They give examples comparing cut
score defining questions using Colorado as the trivial end of the scale with
Massachusetts at the high end.
o Assessing the Role of K-12 Academic Standards in States: Workshop Summary, Nat’l
Academies Press (2007). Uses the Nat’l Assessment of Educational Performance testing
to compare all states. Again Colorado is in the lowest group of states.
o The SARs (School Accountability Reports) published by the Colorado Department of
Education are “graded on the curve” affairs within Colorado. Thus, they do not highlight
the big gap in what our kids are being provided and what the best global competition is
receiving.
o The Colorado Closing the Achievement Gap Commission Final Report (2005), “Over a
third of a century ago, Robert Kennedy called the achievement gap between minority
and disadvantaged kids a stain on our national honor. In the meantime we have spent
billions on finding a solution but the problem is demonstrably worse now than when
RFK made his observation. “
o The rates of improvement among Colorado schools are glacial at best which means since
our competitor nations are continually improving faster that our kids are falling further
and further behind.
 How could this happen with all of the resources we throw at education? What do objective
experts have to say?
o E.D. Hirsch Jr. U of Virginia emeritus professor, decades long education researcher,
author of excellent books on our education status and problems, stimulus for the
“Massachusetts Miracle.”
 The Knowledge Deficit (2006), He calls the current situation a “perfect storm” of
Bad Educational Ideas. “The reason for this state of affairs – tragic for millions
of students as well as for the nation – is that an army of American educators
and reading experts are fundamentally wrong in their ideas about education
and especially about reading comprehension. Their well-intentioned yet
mistaken views are the significant reason (more than other constantly blamed
factors, even poverty) that many of our children are not attaining reading
proficiency, thus crippling their later schooling.”
 The dominant ideas in American education are virtually unchallenged within the
educational community. American education expertise (which is not the same
 as educational expertise in nations that perform better than we do) has a
monolithic character in which dissent is stifled.
 Principles that constitute a kind of theology are drilled into prospective
teachers like a catechism. The only way to improve scores in reading
comprehension and to narrow the reading gap between groups is to
systematically provide children with the wide-ranging, specific background
knowledge they need to comprehend what they read.”
 Massachusetts got rid of the harmful and never effective “how-to” based
approach (the Hirsch stimulated Massachusetts Miracle) replacing it with a
content rich approach and saw their achievement scores soar. Of course, in
Massachusetts the educators didn’t lead the charge, it was required by the
legislature whose leadership mustered the courage to oppose the unions and
other education power groups.
 Conclusion: the curricula favored by the education schools and that our
educators are taught to believe in don’t work. They don’t stand scientific
scrutiny. Thus, until the educators are forced to use curricula that work no
major improvement can take place. All of the effort and expense of trying to
“improve” the scientifically proven to not work current methods and curricula
are a waste of valuable resources and kids’ futures.
o Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin, member of National Academies. Is
America Falling off the Flat Earth?
 It seems that the longer our children are exposed to our K-12 education system,
the worse they do. If we wish to be average by global standards, we will need
to improve a great deal. Can anyone imagine a football coach at any American
high school greeting his players on the first day of fall practice by saying, “This
year let’s get out there and try to be average for the Gipper!”?
 It can, of course, be argued that comparing averages and medians tells only part
of the story, as indeed is often the case. But in this instance, further parsing of
the data generally reveals that the United States has a disproportionately
small share of the highest performers and a disproportionately large share of
the lowest performers. Although this is widely overlooked, it is not simply the
poorer-performing students who are falling through the gaping cracks of our
educational system but also the highest performers who—much to the
nation’s detriment—are frequently being forced to learn in an environment
approaching the lowest common denominator.
 The problem of low expectations has not been confined to California. Alabama,
for example, reported that in 2005, 83% of its fourth-graders ranked as
“proficient” on its state test of academic achievement. But in the most widely
accepted national test, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, only
22% of Alabama’s fourth-graders scored at or above the proficient level. In
 truth, neither of the measures matters much. What counts today is how the
children of Alabama rank with the children of Singapore, Moscow, Hong Kong,
Delhi, Beijing, and Berlin. There is little consolation in being first among losers.
o David Klein’s A Brief History of American K-12 Mathematics Education in the 20th
Century
 The Progressive Education Catechism: Klein relates how the progressives (John
Dewey, et al) took control of the education schools in the 1930s. Their view was
and is that subjects should be taught to students based on their direct practical
value, or if students independently wanted to learn those subjects. This point of
view toward education comported well with the pedagogical methods endorsed
by progressive education. Limiting education primarily to utilitarian skills
sharply limited academic content, and this helped to justify the slow pace of
student centered, discovery learning, the centerpiece of progressivism.
 Notice the “slow pace” comment. It as if we are using a 1903 Oldsmobile in the
global education race when our best global opponents are using modern and
reliable, up-to-date autos. Until we change to what works, not what we were
taught works and doesn’t, our kids will continue to be harmed.
 Thus, the constructivist, how-to approaches are slower than the content rich
approaches. Because of that they simply can’t get the job done compared to
our global competitors who use the methods that stand scientific scrutiny and
work much better. Also, comprehension is very dependent on background
knowledge. The progressive approach does not provide knowledge [content
rigor] and hence understanding of what is being taught.
 The Progressive’s approach is particularly harmful to “gap” students.
 Let’s look at a local example. I use District 11, not because it is the worst case but because it is
the largest local district and representative of the situation. While reading achievement is
unsatisfactory, math is really, really unsatisfactory.
50
40 Grade 3 D11 Math
30 Grade 4 CSAP 09
20 Grade 5
10 Grade 6
0 Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10

 Initial conclusions from the data

o The math teaching process in D11 is performing at an unacceptable level.
It transforms the mostly proficient 3rd graders into mostly unproficient 10th
graders over time. A good process would start well and end better.

o The chart shows that students are advancing each year in math skill much
less than the very weak Colorado standards increase.
o Every large district in Colorado has charts that have the same shape. They
just shift up and down with the “demographic luck of the draw” for their
student population.
o Why does it matter? The American Institutes for Research (2007) reported
on a study they had done comparing the NAEP to TIMSS (The International
Math and Science Study). The results showed that the US 8 th grade math
students scored 27% proficient or better while Singapore math students
scored 73% proficient or better. 17 nations scored better than the US,
including Hungary, Slovak Rep. Slovenia, Canada, Russia, Malaysia, etc.
China and India who have strong math teaching records weren’t in the
testing but would have scored ahead of us almost certainly.
o D11 Grade 10 CSAP Disaggregated Math, Prof or Better
 Blue is Black
50
students,
40 Red is
Hispanic
30 students,
20 Green is
White
10 students

0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

The NCLB requirement is that all students will score proficient or better by
2014. Unless something changes dramatically, it isn’t going to happen. The
district is ignoring the requirement because they don’t have a clue on how
to do any differently than they have been brainwashed to do by their ed
school training.
o As in any process the quality of the “final product” is the real measure of
success or failure. That is, how perfect is the finished TV or car? In
education, “What is the diploma worth?” “Don’t worry, the math feature
doesn’t work too well but they can read, sort of.” In math education we
measure results in the third through tenth grades and each grade level
result must be considered in the context of how it contributes or detracts
from the final result (10th grade in this case).
What is the approach of the top competition globally? A quote from the
Singapore Ministry of Education is instructive, from their Nurturing Every
Child, booklet (2006), “Teach Less, Learn More--Syllabuses will be trimmed
without diluting students’ preparedness for higher education. This will free
up time for our students to focus on core knowledge and skills.”
Their approach is the antithesis of the American “mile wide, inch deep”
time wasting approach.
  Why aren’t we doing better in teaching math?

o Too little math subject knowledge among teachers, esp. elementary.

o Misunderstanding of hierarchical nature of the study of math. The goal in
elementary math must be providing the foundation for higher level study,
NOT being able to solve arithmetic problems with a calculator or
simplistic, non-universal algorithms, even though that is what is tested at
the elementary level.
 What can the research tell us? Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics,
Liping Ma (2002). Background: She compared Chinese elementary teachers to
American elementary teachers.
o Chinese teachers have 2 to 3 years of “Normal School” training after a 9 th
grade education.
o American teachers have 16 to 18 years of formal education.
o Chinese students typically outperform U.S. students on international
comparisons of mathematics competency in spite of the extra education
level of U.S. teachers.

An Example Problem Ma Used in Her Research

1¾÷½
What She Found—100% of the Chinese teachers computed the correct
answer. Barely 40% of the American teachers computed the correct
answer. In the assessment of approaching the problem in more than one
way, no American teachers did that while about 35% of Chinese teachers
did. In the question of providing at least one correct story (relevant context
for students) about 90% of the Chinese teachers were successful while only
2% of the American teachers were able to do it. Ma’s conclusions:
o “Even expert teachers, experienced teachers who were
[inappropriately] mathematically confident, and teachers who
actively participated in current mathematics teaching reform did
not seem to have a thorough knowledge of the mathematics taught
in elementary school.”
o Teachers’ subject knowledge correlated very well with their
students’ achievement.
o Number of math courses taken in college did not.

What must be done to fix our education system to really serve the needs of the kids?
 1. Elect political representatives at all levels who can prioritize the kids’ welfare over their
allegiance to the ed power groups who contribute most to their campaigns. This is vital
because the education insiders are all much more interested in protecting their cushy existence
than in serving the kids. Their actions and results are irrefutable evidence of this. I was told in
my research by several superintendents when I pressed them on how the kids could be so
poorly served, “Paul, you don’t understand. Education is run to benefit the adults who work
here, not the kids.” They won’t change unless forced to. It is that simple. The Massachusetts
legislature was able to overcome the power group influence and install content rich
standards. Why can’t Colorado legislators?
2. Help spread the word far and wide about the truth of our educational performance. The
educators have been very successful in using propaganda methods to hide the truth.
3. Realize that while well meaning for the most part, educators don’t understand the reality of
their false beliefs and the harm they are doing. We can’t educate them by civil discussions. I
have tried for years and years. They just ignore the truth because they fall back to their
brainwashed faith in the false gods taught them in their ed schools and reinforced strongly in
their daily work. Education is definitely an “all the puffer bellies all in a row” environment.
Thus, it is up to the public to confront the harmful beliefs and methods of our education system.
This is the only way that positive change can happen. We must have stronger staying power
than the education fiefdom members (delusional, defensive, insular, and inbred).
4. Demand the current constructivist curricula be eliminated from all of our schools. These
include Whole Language and its renamed progeny along with math curricula like EveryDay Math
that do not provide the foundation required for even algebra, let alone more advanced math
studies so important in today’s global competitive environment.
5. Demand that rigorous subject knowledge tests be required for teacher certification. Also,
require periodic rigorous subject knowledge testing for maintaining teacher certification
regardless of tenure.

The list could go on but addressing these problems would provide a real boost to kids’ education
prospects. I hope you will sign up for duty in the “Force Better Education for Our Kids” army. The kids’
need powerful advocacy to overcome the entrenched status quo bias of the self-satisfied education
fiefdom.