 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / August 2008American Indian Public Charter School
This is one more example of the huge success of direct instruction, a structured school, and a coherent curriculum. However, I question Will's claim that the Democratic Party is the "handmaiden" of pseudo- educators. <<Unfortunately, powerful factions fiercely oppose the flourishing. Among them are education schools with their romantic progressivism -- teachers should be mere "enablers" of group learning; self-esteem is a prerequisite for accomplishment, not a consequence thereof.>> =============================== http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/20/AR2008082002947.html Where Paternalism Makes the Grade By George F. Will Thursday, August 21, 2008; A15 OAKLAND, Calif. -- Seated at a solitary desk in the hall outside a classroom, the slender 13-year-old boy with a smile like a sunrise earnestly does remedial algebra, assisted by a paid tutor. She, too, is 13. Both wear the uniform -- white polo shirt, khaki slacks -- of a school that has not yet admitted the boy. It will, because he refuses to go away. The son of Indian immigrants from Mexico, the boy decided he is going to be a doctor, heard about the American Indian Public Charter School here and started showing up. Ben Chavis, AIPCS's benevolent dictator, told the boy that although he was doing well at school, he was not up to the rigors of AIPCS, which is decorated with photographs of the many students it has sent to the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth. So the boy asked, what must I do? Telling young people what they must do is what Chavis does. With close- cropped hair and a short beard flecked with gray, he looks somewhat like Lenin but is less democratic. A Lumbee Indian from North Carolina, he ran track, earned a PhD from the University of Arizona, got rich in real estate ("I wanted to buy back America and lease it to the whites") and decided to fix the world, beginning with AIPCS. Founded in 1996, it swiftly became a multiculturalists' playground where much was tolerated and little was learned. Chavis arrived in 2000 to reverse that condition. Charter schools are not unionized, so he could trim the dead wood, which included all but one staff member. David Whitman, in his book "Sweating the Small Stuff: Inner-City Schools and the New Paternalism," reports that in Chicago from 2003 through 2006, just three of every 1,000 teachers received an "unsatisfactory" rating in annual evaluations; of 87 "failing schools" -- with below-average and declining test scores -- 67 had no teachers rated unsatisfactory; in all of Chicago, just nine teachers received more than one unsatisfactory rating, and none of them was dismissed. Chavis's teachers come from places such as Harvard, Dartmouth, Oberlin, Columbia, Berkeley, Brown and Wesleyan. AIPCS is one of six highly prescriptive schools Whitman studied, where "noncognitive skills" -- responsible behaviors such as self-discipline and cooperativeness -- are part of the cultural capital the curriculum delivers. Many inner-city schools feature a monotonous chaos of disruption. AIPCS -- Oakland's highest-performing middle school -- stresses obligation, not self-expression. Chavis, now "administrator emeritus," is adamant: "Everyone says we should 'preserve our culture.' There is a lot of our culture we should wipe out." A visitor to an AIPCS classroom notices that the children do not notice visitors. Students are taught to sit properly -- no slumping -- and keep their eyes on the teacher. No makeup, no jewelry, no electronic devices. AIPCS's 200 pupils take just 20 minutes for lunch and are with the same teacher in the same classroom all day. Rotating would consume at least 10 minutes, seven times a day. Seventy minutes a day in AIPCS's extra-long 196-day school year would be a lot of lost instruction. The school does not close for Columbus Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day or César Chávez Day. Every student takes four pre-AP (Advanced Placement) classes. There are three hours of homework a night, three weeks of summer math instruction. Seventh-graders take the SAT. College is assumed. Paternalism is the restriction of freedom for the good of the person restricted. AIPCS acts in loco parentis because Chavis, who is cool toward parental involvement, wants an enveloping school culture that combats the culture of poverty and the streets. He and other practitioners of the new paternalism -- once upon a time, schooling was understood as democracy's permissible, indeed obligatory, paternalism -- are proving that cultural pessimists are mistaken: We know how to close the achievement gap that often separates minorities from whites before kindergarten and widens through high school. A growing cohort of people possess the pedagogic skills to make "no excuses" schools flourish. Unfortunately, powerful factions fiercely oppose the flourishing. Among them are education schools with their romantic progressivism -- teachers should be mere "enablers" of group learning; self-esteem is a prerequisite for accomplishment, not a consequence thereof. Other opponents are the teachers unions and their handmaiden, the Democratic Party. Today's liberals favor paternalism -- you cannot eat trans fats; you must buy health insurance -- for everyone except children. Odd. georgewill@washpost.com Consider the source. George Will has been an apologist for privatizers for generations. This is one more example of the huge success of direct instruction, a structured school, and a coherent curriculum. However, I question Will's claim that the Democratic Party is the "handmaiden" of pseudo- educators. <<Unfortunately, powerful factions fiercely oppose the flourishing. Among them are education schools with their romantic progressivism -- teachers should be mere "enablers" of group learning; self-esteem is a prerequisite for accomplishment, not a consequence thereof.>> =============================== http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/20/AR2008082002947.html Where Paternalism Makes the Grade By George F. Will Thursday, August 21, 2008; A15 OAKLAND, Calif. -- Seated at a solitary desk in the hall outside a classroom, the slender 13-year-old boy with a smile like a sunrise earnestly does remedial algebra, assisted by a paid tutor. She, too, is 13. Both wear the uniform -- white polo shirt, khaki slacks -- of a school that has not yet admitted the boy. It will, because he refuses to go away. The son of Indian immigrants from Mexico, the boy decided he is going to be a doctor, heard about the American Indian Public Charter School here and started showing up. Ben Chavis, AIPCS's benevolent dictator, told the boy that although he was doing well at school, he was not up to the rigors of AIPCS, which is decorated with photographs of the many students it has sent to the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth. So the boy asked, what must I do? Telling young people what they must do is what Chavis does. With close- cropped hair and a short beard flecked with gray, he looks somewhat like Lenin but is less democratic. A Lumbee Indian from North Carolina, he ran track, earned a PhD from the University of Arizona, got rich in real estate ("I wanted to buy back America and lease it to the whites") and decided to fix the world, beginning with AIPCS. Founded in 1996, it swiftly became a multiculturalists' playground where much was tolerated and little was learned. Chavis arrived in 2000 to reverse that condition. Charter schools are not unionized, so he could trim the dead wood, which included all but one staff member. David Whitman, in his book "Sweating the Small Stuff: Inner-City Schools and the New Paternalism," reports that in Chicago from 2003 through 2006, just three of every 1,000 teachers received an "unsatisfactory" rating in annual evaluations; of 87 "failing schools" -- with below-average and declining test scores -- 67 had no teachers rated unsatisfactory; in all of Chicago, just nine teachers received more than one unsatisfactory rating, and none of them was dismissed. Chavis's teachers come from places such as Harvard, Dartmouth, Oberlin, Columbia, Berkeley, Brown and Wesleyan. AIPCS is one of six highly prescriptive schools Whitman studied, where "noncognitive skills" -- responsible behaviors such as self-discipline and cooperativeness -- are part of the cultural capital the curriculum delivers. Many inner-city schools feature a monotonous chaos of disruption. AIPCS -- Oakland's highest-performing middle school -- stresses obligation, not self-expression. Chavis, now "administrator emeritus," is adamant: "Everyone says we should 'preserve our culture.' There is a lot of our culture we should wipe out." A visitor to an AIPCS classroom notices that the children do not notice visitors. Students are taught to sit properly -- no slumping -- and keep their eyes on the teacher. No makeup, no jewelry, no electronic devices. AIPCS's 200 pupils take just 20 minutes for lunch and are with the same teacher in the same classroom all day. Rotating would consume at least 10 minutes, seven times a day. Seventy minutes a day in AIPCS's extra-long 196-day school year would be a lot of lost instruction. The school does not close for Columbus Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day or César Chávez Day. Every student takes four pre-AP (Advanced Placement) classes. There are three hours of homework a night, three weeks of summer math instruction. Seventh-graders take the SAT. College is assumed. Paternalism is the restriction of freedom for the good of the person restricted. AIPCS acts in loco parentis because Chavis, who is cool toward parental involvement, wants an enveloping school culture that combats the culture of poverty and the streets. He and other practitioners of the new paternalism -- once upon a time, schooling was understood as democracy's permissible, indeed obligatory, paternalism -- are proving that cultural pessimists are mistaken: We know how to close the achievement gap that often separates minorities from whites before kindergarten and widens through high school. A growing cohort of people possess the pedagogic skills to make "no excuses" schools flourish. Unfortunately, powerful factions fiercely oppose the flourishing. Among them are education schools with their romantic progressivism -- teachers should be mere "enablers" of group learning; self-esteem is a prerequisite for accomplishment, not a consequence thereof. Other opponents are the teachers unions and their handmaiden, the Democratic Party. Today's liberals favor paternalism -- you cannot eat trans fats; you must buy health insurance -- for everyone except children. Odd. georgewill@washpost.com >Consider the source. >George Will has been an apologist for privatizers for generations. Is he an apologist or an advocate? I am an advocate, because I see no way the public schools can do a decent job. The public schools are so set against real academic excellence that even a genius can be turned off by them. A bright child is likely to be ahead of the teacher in a few weeks of the term. We need to teach sound academics, not just memorization and routine, and expect the students to be able to use the material in subsequent courses, instead of excessive review. This should hold even if the courses are in different fields. The concepts persist, even if the details are lost, and the details can be recovered quickly. But the teachers cannot teach the concepts, because they can no longer think that way. >This is one more example of the huge success of direct instruction, a >structured school, and a coherent curriculum. However, I question >Will's claim that the Democratic Party is the "handmaiden" of pseudo- >educators. ><<Unfortunately, powerful factions fiercely oppose the flourishing. >Among them are education schools with their romantic progressivism -- >teachers should be mere "enablers" of group learning; self-esteem is a >prerequisite for accomplishment, not a consequence thereof.>> >=============================== >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/20/AR2008082002947.html >Where Paternalism Makes the Grade >By George F. Will >Thursday, August 21, 2008; A15 >OAKLAND, Calif. -- Seated at a solitary desk in the hall outside a >classroom, the slender 13-year-old boy with a smile like a sunrise >earnestly does remedial algebra, assisted by a paid tutor. She, too, >is 13. Both wear the uniform -- white polo shirt, khaki slacks -- of a >school that has not yet admitted the boy. It will, because he refuses >to go away. >The son of Indian immigrants from Mexico, the boy decided he is going >to be a doctor, heard about the American Indian Public Charter School [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >many students it has sent to the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented >Youth. So the boy asked, what must I do? Here is a boy who is willing and able to learn. The public schools cannot accommodate him; he needs an academic school. The same holds for the bright children of those in other low socio-economic classes, where the culture is even against academic excellence. It is those, and the ones from other groups, who we need to educate. The Joe Sixpacks cannot understand this attitude, of willing to spend time in learning instead of playing with their so-called "peers", who merely are at the same age. Nor can the educationists running the schools, or most of the teachers they have trained; trained, and not educated. .................  SignatureThis address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 >>Consider the source. >>George Will has been an apologist for privatizers for generations. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > turned off by them. A bright child is likely to be > ahead of the teacher in a few weeks of the term. Then why do public schools outperform private and charter schools? Study: Public schools outperform private schools in student achievement May 10, 2005 A new study turns conventional wisdom on its head about the academic performance of public and private school students, finding that public school students significantly outperform their private school peers in math after controlling for demographic and socioeconomic factors. The overall achievement advantage held by private schools is attributed to the stark differences in student body demographics and socioeconomic status between public and private schools, according to the study by researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The researchers examined 4th graders’ and 8th graders’ math scores from the 2000 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). http://www.nsba.org/site/view.asp?CID=421&DID=35915 SignatureWhen tyranny is law, Revolution is order. --Pedro Albizu Campos |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.