Fwd: [eddra] Response to Mark Trentacoste's Response to Jerry Bracey

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Michael Martin" <mike@azsba.org>
> Date: Tue Mar 7, 2006  4:03:56 PM US/Pacific
> To: <mbsolomon@aol.com>, <eddra@yahoogroups.com>
> Cc: <mct210@aol.com>
> Subject: RE: [eddra] Response to Mark Trentacoste's Response to Jerry 
> Bracey
>
> I think you are missing four key points.
>
> First, if "achievement" is measured primarily by tests that measure
> family wealth (which is well documented and probably politically
> motivated), then it is impossible to close the achievement gap without
> closing the wealth gap. This is Bracey's point in bringing the
> international poverty statistics into play. I have difficulty
> understanding why people develop tests that are known to be heavily
> influenced by wealth and then complain when poor people do not do as
> well on the test as affluent people. It's like, let's measure which is
> better, similar size marshmallows or unshelled walnuts, and use weight
> per item to decide. I have shown that NAEP scores indicate Arizona has
> an educational system that creates some of the greatest improvement in
> test scores between the fourth and eighth grade. But no one wants to
> measure academic gain because it is not influenced as much by wealth.
> But it is GAIN that is ACHIEVEMENT, regular scores are status.
>
> Second, we have vigilantes patrolling the border with Mexico, we have
> movies that demonstrate the U.S. economy would crumble without illegal
> immigrant labor, we have a national icon that asks the world to send us
> their "wretched refuse," we have reservations of Native Americans, and
> we have a U.S. Supreme Court decision that says public schools have to
> educate all of their children, but we measure achievement in formal
> suburban English and expect these students to do as well as students 
> who
> have never known another language. Have a professor of literature take
> an NAEP reading test and see how well he/she scores if the professor
> teaches in Heidelberg, or Istanbul, or Mexico City. Does a low NAEP
> score by a foreign professor of literature mean he/she cannot read? 
> Same
> for American kids.
>
> Third, if you poison poor children with environmental lead that is 
> known
> to create brain damage, learning difficulties, misbehavior, and ADHD
> then whenever you measure achievement these poisoned poor children will
> demonstrate test scores affected by this brain damage and the affluent
> children will not. I think it is totally asinine to talk about closing
> the achievement gap when we ignore a well documented medical problem
> that guarantees an achievement gap. I am completely flabbergasted by
> people who say we are going to improve schools to raise achievement but
> we are going to continue to poison children. When does reality rear its
> ugly head in this debate?
>
> Fourth, affluent children primarily learn to read on their parents laps
> when very young and see the parents point to words and pictures in
> colorful books while associating them with ideas. Affluent children
> learn at a very early age that words correspond to ideas long before
> they even know what letters and words are. Later they seek to extract
> those ideas from words by themselves and therefore are very receptive 
> to
> learning to read. Poor children generally do not receive this early
> association between text and ideas. Then when they reach school people
> try to short circuit the process by teaching them phonics. But phonics
> teaches children that text corresponds to sounds rather than ideas.
> Indeed, many phonics programs utilize nonsense words in order to 
> prevent
> the child from associating ideas with words. As a consequence, poor
> children lack the fundamental association between text and ideas: they
> read words as sounds (i.e. "I read it but I don't understand it"). When
> they get to fourth grade and beyond they are unable to read for ideas,
> and unfortunately when they reach algebra they are unable to read
> formulas as ideas either.
>
> Michael T. Martin
> Research Analyst
> Arizona School Boards Association
> 2100 N. Central Ave, Suite 200
> Phoenix, Az 85004
> 602-254-1100 1-800-238-4701
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eddra@yahoogroups.com [mailto:eddra@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> mbsolomon@aol.com
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 4:02 PM
> To: eddra@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [eddra] Response to Mark Trentacoste's Response to Jerry 
> Bracey
>
> Mark my good friend, in response to Jerry's critique of ACT, every time
> someone says what you did, "If someone ever figures out a way to give
> our underclass students a shot at a decent education....," I cringe.
>
> On average, a "decent education" has to do with poverty or lack 
> thereof.
> What you are really saying, I think, is:
>
> If someone ever figures out a way to give our underclass students a way
> to chatch up from the deprivation of their first 6 years of
> life......... .
>
> Kids from poverty too often can't recognize letters, numbers, or words
> when they start school.  They don't understand reading, books,
> newspapers.  They haven't undergone so many experiences that make a
> positive impact on brain development in the first 6 years of their
> lives.
>
> It just can't be true that in every state and virtually every school
> district, we fail to give children from poverty a "decent education,"
> because the teachers are substandard or the schools are no good.  That
> is, unless you define "decent."  Because, on average,  decent, for poor
> kids, is different from decent for the rest.
>
> I think what you are saying Mark, is that we need to figure out how we
> can help kids from poverty catch up.  But, if they take the same 
> courses
> in the same classes as their better-prepared colleagues, then all will
> progress, not just the poor kids.  So if you compare the two groups,
> after a similar good education, the poor kids, on average, never catch
> up.
>
> But if you define "decent" differently, I am on the same page with you.
> This is because, I believe that the KIPP approach is the only
> systematic, repeatable  road to success that we have seen yet.  Much
> more time on task (10+ hours per day instead of 6), much more 
> commitment
> (contracts), much more parental involvement(contracts) and much more
> from the teachers (long hours, Saturday work, summer work).  Now that's
> likely to be the ticket to "decent."
>
> Thanks....Marty Solomon
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> 	
> *	 Visit your group "eddra <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra> "
> on the web.
> 	
> *	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> 	 eddra-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:eddra-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> 	
> *	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     eddra-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/