Archive for the ‘Parental Involvement’ Category
Start checking your kindergartner’s credit report
January 15th, 2008
A new database will be collecting kindergartner’s social security numbers.
The new database for kindergarten test scores also includes sections for children’s names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, gender, school identification numbers and parents’ names and addresses, educators say.
For some odd reason, some people are disturbed by this.
“As adults you don’t even put your Social Security card in your wallet,” said Mr. Lukert, an officer with the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association. “And yet here we are required to give that information out. It doesn’t make sense.”
Basically, TEA is telling everyone to just “trust us.”
“It’s quite amazing the security that OZ has in place for this information,” said Susan Landry, director of the UT group, known as the State Center for Early Childhood Development. “You are overemphasizing the Social Security number.”
So the Social Security number isn’t that big of a deal? Then why use it all?
Pearson Educational Measurement officials, who develop or administer standardized tests in Texas and 22 other states, say they use ID numbers to link students to their test data.
“I don’t think in the testing side of it that we ever encounter Social Security numbers,” said David Hakensen, vice president of public relations.
I suspect that parents aren’t required to provide Social Security numbers unless maybe they’re receiving some sort of direct federal aid such as free lunch. I could be totally wrong here.
However, I went to my local school district website to see what documents would be needed to enroll my child and it said:
Back To School : Northside Independent School District - San Antonio, TX 78238
Child’s Social Security Number (if available)
Furthermore, the TEA PEIMS Data Standards makes it sound like Social Security numbers aren’t required either.
Identification - the information necessary to identify the person. This information is Social Security number or state-approved alternative student ID and student name. It is requested for all students.
Notice, it says “requested.” So how many schools request the information and parents provide it assuming that it’s required?
While part of the issue is trust, another part is “why do you need the data?” Do they need it because they want to link it to other data that is based on social security data? Or do they want it just because it will be easier than generating their own id system? And if they can’t tell us, what does that do to the trust factor?
Technorati Tags: Texas Education, Social Security Numbers, TEA, Texas Education Agency, OZ Systems, State Center for Early Childhood Development, Susan Landry
Accountability
February 5th, 2007
There are so many who want education reform based on “running a business” and accountability that I think it’s time to explain the situation in language they should understand.
Let’s pretend that you run a plant nursery. You sell a healthy, well-kept tree to your customer. You give them fertilizer and detailed instructions. You might even go out and check on the tree every so often. If the tree fails to grow because it doesn’t receive enough fertilizer, who’s fault is it?
Or maybe you’re a mechanic and you get a new customer who had been taking his car to another mechanic. The car hasn’t been maintained so you do a tune-up and explain basic maintenance tasks. The customer takes the car home and it breaks down. Are you a bad mechanic?
How about being a doctor and you’re treating a child for asthma and the child keeps having asthma attacks because the parent continues to smoke around the child. (Okay, I’m winging it here since I don’t what all can cause asthma attacks.) Would your treatment of the patient be considered successful?
Of course, in most cases your customers hold up “their side” of the transaction. Even so, as a manager you would need to take account such problem customers as the ones described above when evaluating your employees. You would have to figure which employees have had truly difficult customer situations and which are just using it as an excuse for poor performance.
However, if you were to use the methods suggested from the Texans for Excellence in the Classroom report, you would simply provide the mechanic with three more sessions on how to be a good mechanic. And if the customer’s car breaks down again, fire the mechanic. The doctor would be given special training on dealing with asthma patients and if the child continued to have attacks, her license would be revoked.
As much as people would like to believe otherwise, education reform isn’t going to have a simple, easy solution. It’s not true in business, why should it be in education?
I don’t think all teachers are against being evaluate in their performance. I do think they want and deserve to have extenuating circumstances considered in their evaluations.
You can’t “make” people into good parents by passing laws to make them go to teacher conferences or feed their children five vegetables a day. There is no licensing process you have to go through before you can be a parent even though there are plenty of parents out there who are walking advertisements for such a system.
As long as there is such a large uncontrollable variable that effects the results, it’s not only unfair to the teachers to apply a one size fits all to education accountability, it’s unfair to the student as well. Schools that take the time and energy needed to truly address education deficiencies that originate in the home are penalized.
Do businesses succeed when they focus on short-term earnings for investors or investment in infrastructure and training? Both? It all depends? Do businesses succeed when they take a “one size fits all” approach? Can you think of a better way to set up public schools to fail than demand that “no child be left behind?”
HB 557: Holding Parents Accountable
January 17th, 2007
80(R) HB 557 - Introduced version - Bill Text:
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT relating to the failure of a parent to attend a public school parent-teacher conference; providing a criminal penalty.
???????BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: ???????SECTION?1.??Chapter 26, Education Code, is amended by adding Section 26.014 to read as follows: ???????Sec.?26.014.??FAILURE TO ATTEND PARENT-TEACHER CONFERENCE.
(a) A parent of a student commits an offense if:
?????????????(1)??the parent receives written notice by certified mail of at least three proposed dates from which the parent can choose for scheduling a parent-teacher conference between the parent and the student’s teacher;
?????????????(2)??the parent:
???????????????????(A)??fails to respond to the notice; or
???????????????????(B)??schedules a parent-teacher conference on one of the dates proposed in the notice or on an alternative date agreed to by the parent and teacher and fails to:
?????????????????????????(i)??attend the scheduled conference; or
?????????????????????????(ii)??before the scheduled conference, notify the teacher or an administrator of the campus to which the teacher is assigned that the parent will be unable to attend the conference; and
?????????????(3)??in the case of a student with more than one parent, another parent of the student does not attend a parent-teacher conference scheduled in accordance with this subsection.
???????(b)??An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
???????(c)??An offense under this section may be prosecuted in a court in which an offense under Section 25.094(b) may be prosecuted.
???????(d)??It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the parent had a reasonable excuse for failing to attend the parent-teacher conference.
???????(e)??The clerk of the court in which an offense under this section is prosecuted shall transfer the proceeds of any fine collected by the court under this section to the school district that employs the teacher with whom the parent was scheduled to meet in the parent-teacher conference. The district may use funds collected under this section only to: ?????????????(1)??provide additional compensation to classroom teachers in the district; or
?????????????(2)??purchase school supplies other than textbooks as defined by Section 31.002.
???????SECTION?2.??This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.
I don’t believe that I’ve ever been one to hold teachers’ solely accountable for student achievement since parent involvement is obviously a significant factor in the equation. And while I’m sure that there are many teachers who think that parents need to be held accountable for their actions (and many parents who deserve it), I’m not sure this is the way to do it.
Besides the various legalities involved and the burden it might place on a parent to present an affirmative defense, I don’t think this will really accomplish anything except maybe collect some additional funds for the classroom.
Think about it this way. A teacher schedules a parent-teacher conference. The parents don’t show up because a: their cultural or economic situation affects their ability to respond to the summons appropriately or b: they think it’s a waste of time. Now if the case is a, you have just added another burden on the parents to defend themselves. They can’t get time off of work (I’m sure there’s a bill to address that as well) but they will have to take time off to appear before a judge to explain why they can’t attend the conference.
Then there is case b. You now have a law that forces the parents to show up if for no other reason so that they avoid a fine. What do you think will be accomplish during that conference period? They will see the light and make sure junior does his homework every night? They will start enforcing a reasonable bed time for their kids or turn off the tv? Talk about a hostile audience.
I can just see this progressing until we have some version of NCLB for parents. As in the case of students, they will first be forced to spend a certain amount of time receiving “instruction.” Then someone will realize that it would be a good idea if they were to actually learn something from the instruction and will implement some sort of “no pass no play” rule for parents.
This may seem like such a simple solution to the problem of the lack of parental involvement. However, if we have learned anything in education reform, there are no simple solutions.
Unschooling disguised as recess
January 1st, 2007
Looks like parents might be able to save recess based on local values.
80(R) HB 366 - Introduced version - Bill Text:
SECTION?1.??This Act may be cited as the “Freedom to Play and Learn Act.”
???????SECTION?2.??Section 28.004, Education Code, is amended by adding Subsection (l) to read as follows:
???????(l)??The local school health advisory council shall consider and may make policy recommendations concerning the importance of daily recess for elementary school students. The council may consider any research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development, and the health benefits of daily recess in making the recommendations. The council shall ensure that local community values are reflected in any policy recommendation made to the district under this subsection.
It does make you wonder what other areas parents would be interested in having some influence over. And will this provide “legitimization” for unschoolers? After all, they can use any “research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development.” Sounds like supporting unschooling to me.
