Florida's rejection of math textbooks "due" to CRT

[ciao_yall]

Even if the students helping others improve their own learning in the process, it would be a wild *coincidence (aka magical) if the amount of time they spent helping always resulted in their learning more that the same amount of time devoted to their own learning of new topics or deeper study of familiar topics.

*Especially since how much time they spend helping is probably determined by things like how busy the teacher is, rather than by any evidence-based study of what is optimal. (And since teachers are always claiming to be overworked, the amount of time students are helping each other doesn't seem in anyway "optimal" by the teacher's standards.)

So while pursuing these different goals at the same time may seem like a good idea, there's no basis for any claim that the whole setup in some way optimizes student learning, or even the entire "student experience", however that might be defined.

It would also be a wild *coincidence (aka magical) if it a school streamed all learners in such a way that they were at the exact same level, learning at the exact same pace, in the exact same way.

[marshwiggle]

Even if the students helping others improve their own learning in the process, it would be a wild *coincidence (aka magical) if the amount of time they spent helping always resulted in their learning more that the same amount of time devoted to their own learning of new topics or deeper study of familiar topics.

*Especially since how much time they spend helping is probably determined by things like how busy the teacher is, rather than by any evidence-based study of what is optimal. (And since teachers are always claiming to be overworked, the amount of time students are helping each other doesn't seem in anyway "optimal" by the teacher's standards.)

So while pursuing these different goals at the same time may seem like a good idea, there's no basis for any claim that the whole setup in some way optimizes student learning, or even the entire "student experience", however that might be defined.

It would also be a wild *coincidence (aka magical) if it a school streamed all learners in such a way that they were at the exact same level, learning at the exact same pace, in the exact same way.

That would be completely individualized learning, since each student is unique.

The amount of time students spend helping other students in a diverse classroom is determined by resources; ie. how much time the teacher has per student. But the decision to put all of those students in one class is determined by ideology; given a certain number of students and a certain number of teachers,  the same amount of resources are used regardless of how the students are divided up.

(I previously haven't brought this up, but when students with severe discipline issues are put in regular classrooms that seriously impacts the learning of everyone else. When an entire classroom has to be evacuated because of one student's meltdown, there's no way to argue that somehow the other students are "better off".)

[Wahoo Redux]

Admit that you simply lapsed into a stereotypical rant from the rightwing peanut gallery.

From that organ of the rightwing peanut gallery, Wikipedia:
Mainstreaming (education)

Mainstreaming, in the context of education, is the practice of placing students with special education needs in a general education classroom during specific time periods based on their skills. To clarify, this means students who are a part of the special education classroom will join the regular education classroom at certain times which are fitting for the special education student.

Proponents of both the philosophy of educational inclusion assert that educating children with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers fosters understanding and tolerance, better preparing students of all abilities to function in the world beyond school. Children with special needs may face social stigma as a result of being mainstreamed, but also may help them socially develop.

Note that proponents support it for reasons of social inclusion, rather than for any pedagogical reasons.

Explicitly:

Dr. Kenneth Shore comments on the least restrictive environment by claiming, "Determining what is the least restrictive environment for a particular student requires balancing the need for the child to learn to integrate socially with his non-disabled peers with the need for the child to receive instruction appropriate to his abilities."

Again, even the proponents realize that the child's education will be better in a specialized environment, while the mainstreaming is for social integration.

(And of course, teachers and their unions are always pushing for smaller class sizes, because of the range of students in their classes and the individual needs they have.) Even if social integration is an important goal, it is in conflict with best practices pedagogically.

Has no relevance at all to the little tirade you posted earlier and you know it.  You let your mask slip for a moment, Marshy, and now you are trying to strawman it back on.

[marshwiggle]

Again, even the proponents realize that the child's education will be better in a specialized environment, while the mainstreaming is for social integration.

(And of course, teachers and their unions are always pushing for smaller class sizes, because of the range of students in their classes and the individual needs they have.) Even if social integration is an important goal, it is in conflict with best practices pedagogically.

Has no relevance at all to the little tirade you posted earlier and you know it.  You let your mask slip for a moment, Marshy, and now you are trying to strawman it back on.

I must bow to your psychic abilities. You can read my mind through the ether while I admit to often having no idea what you're implying with your cryptic responses. I am clearly out of my depth.

[Wahoo Redux]

I am clearly out of my depth.

No.

But sometimes you post Sean-Hannity-esque propaganda which you cannot back up with any sort of objective evidence.  That kind of posting flies at One America New or Newsmax but not at a place like The Fora.

[marshwiggle]

I am clearly out of my depth.

No.

But sometimes you post Sean-Hannity-esque propaganda which you cannot back up with any sort of objective evidence.  That kind of posting flies at One America New or Newsmax but not at a place like The Fora.

So if you're referring to this:

The "educators" threw in all kinds of stuff with no pedagogical value for the sake of ideology. (If you can show me research that math attached to random factoids from some area that has nothing to do with math enhances learning, then go ahead.)
Education wonks are some of the worst for trying to impose social engineering goals on society at the expense of actual education. ("Whole language" is an obvious example; phonics fell out of favour even though there was lots of evidence of its value. Same for learning algorithms for solving math problems.) Basically anything prescriptive is removed in favour of vague open-ended approaches to obscure the gap between students who are figuring it out and students who are struggling. In principle identifying struggling students is vitally important in order to give them more help, and having established processes for them to follow will help them succeed. But much of the emphasis has shifted to trying to raise their self-esteem without raising their competence.

Then I would point to this:
World education rankings: which country does best at reading, maths and science?

From the report, South Korea is #1; US is #14.
With all of the resources and expertise that the US has, why isn't the US at the top, or at least in the top 5?

The most obvious answer is that academic performance has not been prioritized as highly in the US as other things, such as social inclusion.  The choice of which factors to prioritize is an ideological one.

[Wahoo Redux]

Marshy, Marshy, Marshy...

Try this:

So if you're referring to this:

The "educators" threw in all kinds of stuff with no pedagogical value for the sake of ideology.

Education wonks are some of the worst for trying to impose social engineering goals on society at the expense of actual education.

But much of the emphasis has shifted to trying to raise their self-esteem without raising their competence.

Straining to back up your OAN-esque claims you try yet another uncited strawman:

Then I would point to this:
World education rankings: which country does best at reading, maths and science?

From the report, South Korea is #1; US is #14.
With all of the resources and expertise that the US has, why isn't the US at the top, or at least in the top 5?

The most obvious answer is that academic performance has not been prioritized as highly in the US as other things, such as social inclusion.  The choice of which factors to prioritize is an ideological one.

Is that the "most obvious answer?"  Really!?  Can you prove that?  Or is it simply that our educational system is underfunded and mediocre in some regards?  And please note that we are well ahead of many other industrialized nations and that our scores actually exceed or almost-match the average.

Spin, Marshy, spin.

[marshwiggle]

Then I would point to this:
World education rankings: which country does best at reading, maths and science?

From the report, South Korea is #1; US is #14.
With all of the resources and expertise that the US has, why isn't the US at the top, or at least in the top 5?

The most obvious answer is that academic performance has not been prioritized as highly in the US as other things, such as social inclusion.  The choice of which factors to prioritize is an ideological one.

Is that the "most obvious answer?"  Really!?  Can you prove that?  Or is it simply that our educational system is underfunded and mediocre in some regards?

But that's just the point; why would the US system be "underfunded and mediocre"? With all of the expertise and resources available, in a country that *prides itself on being "the best" at all kinds of things, does it make sense that this kind of performance is OK?

(*And just a reminder: conservatives are probably more likely than liberals to argue that the US is best, so getting them to spend money to achieve or maintain that status should be like shooting fish in a barrel.)

And please note that we are well ahead of many other industrialized nations and that our scores actually exceed or almost-match the average.

Talk about damning with faint praise.
Being "almost average" isn't something most people would crow about.

[jimbogumbo]

There is a wealth of research on why the US i where it is in the rankings. Look at the many TIMMs reports.

One obvious answer is teacher prep and expectations in the classroom. The best explanation in my opinion.

Interthreaduality- One large study of videos of representative classrooms showed a striking difference in the teacher expectations contrasting the US, Germany and Japan. The Japanese classrooms had much fewer questions asked and discussed, but at a much higher level. All students were expected to create theiR own solutions. Germany had a much lower level, the US even lower. When a student asks how in the US the teacher immediately showed them how; not in Japan.

The Asian countries as well as Hungary and the Eastern bloc nations all focused on higher levels  of concepts along with that expectation. Please also note the Asian countries required more days of school, and after school tutoring on skills and rote material is a cultural expectation.

The US math educators have been arguing for student "productive struggle" to be the classroom norm for 40 years to little avail.

[Wahoo Redux]

And please note that we are well ahead of many other industrialized nations and that our scores actually exceed or almost-match the average.

Talk about damning with faint praise.
Being "almost average" isn't something most people would crow about.

Point being, nothing you've posted backs up your Conservapedia-style rantings from earlier----which you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge. 

Americans talk big, that does not mean Americans want to pay to be the best (see jimbogumbo's post).

You know, if you are really worried about dogmatic, ideological teaching aimed at kids, you should disavow C.S. Lewis.

[marshwiggle]

There is a wealth of research on why the US i where it is in the rankings. Look at the many TIMMs reports.

One obvious answer is teacher prep and expectations in the classroom. The best explanation in my opinion.

Interthreaduality- One large study of videos of representative classrooms showed a striking difference in the teacher expectations contrasting the US, Germany and Japan. The Japanese classrooms had much fewer questions asked and discussed, but at a much higher level. All students were expected to create theiR own solutions. Germany had a much lower level, the US even lower. When a student asks how in the US the teacher immediately showed them how; not in Japan.

The Asian countries as well as Hungary and the Eastern bloc nations all focused on higher levels  of concepts along with that expectation. Please also note the Asian countries required more days of school, and after school tutoring on skills and rote material is a cultural expectation.

The US math educators have been arguing for student "productive struggle" to be the classroom norm for 40 years to little avail.

Why is that? If it's a partisan thing, then there should be a clear distinction between areas that support the math educators and those that don't based on political affiliation. If there isn't, then it's something deeper.

[apl68]

There is a wealth of research on why the US i where it is in the rankings. Look at the many TIMMs reports.

One obvious answer is teacher prep and expectations in the classroom. The best explanation in my opinion.

Interthreaduality- One large study of videos of representative classrooms showed a striking difference in the teacher expectations contrasting the US, Germany and Japan. The Japanese classrooms had much fewer questions asked and discussed, but at a much higher level. All students were expected to create theiR own solutions. Germany had a much lower level, the US even lower. When a student asks how in the US the teacher immediately showed them how; not in Japan.

The Asian countries as well as Hungary and the Eastern bloc nations all focused on higher levels  of concepts along with that expectation. Please also note the Asian countries required more days of school, and after school tutoring on skills and rote material is a cultural expectation.

The US math educators have been arguing for student "productive struggle" to be the classroom norm for 40 years to little avail.

Students in other countries perform better than those in the U.S. because other countries have far stronger cultural expectations that students will work hard (In the case of East Asian students, very, very hard indeed).  In the U.S. most parents demand very little of their children academically, and most schools expect little of them.  The differences are in large part due to enormously higher levels of breakdown of family structures in the U.S. than in most of these other countries--family dysfunction is so rampant in the U.S. that children simply don't have the support at home that they need to succeed in school.

When it comes to math, American students are further handicapped by a cultural belief that math aptitude is in some way inborn.  A few students have minds that are attracted to math, and feel motivated to do well at it.  Most hate it, refuse to work hard at it, and they and their parents excuse their subsequent failure to do well on their inability to do it.  Or they blame teachers for failing to make it interesting enough, or failing to somehow stick the knowledge into students' heads.  Elsewhere the understanding is that anybody who is not intellectually disabled can do math up to the highest levels, if only he or she will work at it.  If you're not doing well, then you're just not trying hard enough.  No excuses about it being hard or boring accepted, and parents are inclined to place the onus for any failures on the students, not on the teachers. 

As in so many other things, young people in American society are failing because we expect too little of them and give them too little support to do better.  They could do as well as any students in the world if we just gave them stable homes and expectations that they work at things until they get them right.  And didn't hit those students who are most likely to be in dysfunctional family situations with the additional handicap of being grouped together in underfunded schools.  Overall the U.S. spends more money per capita on average than other countries, not less, but the distribution of funds varies wildly across districts.

[jimbogumbo]

There is a wealth of research on why the US i where it is in the rankings. Look at the many TIMMs reports.

One obvious answer is teacher prep and expectations in the classroom. The best explanation in my opinion.

Interthreaduality- One large study of videos of representative classrooms showed a striking difference in the teacher expectations contrasting the US, Germany and Japan. The Japanese classrooms had much fewer questions asked and discussed, but at a much higher level. All students were expected to create theiR own solutions. Germany had a much lower level, the US even lower. When a student asks how in the US the teacher immediately showed them how; not in Japan.

The Asian countries as well as Hungary and the Eastern bloc nations all focused on higher levels  of concepts along with that expectation. Please also note the Asian countries required more days of school, and after school tutoring on skills and rote material is a cultural expectation.

The US math educators have been arguing for student "productive struggle" to be the classroom norm for 40 years to little avail.

Why is that? If it's a partisan thing, then there should be a clear distinction between areas that support the math educators and those that don't based on political affiliation. If there isn't, then it's something deeper.

It has nothing to do with politics. apl68 is right on the mark below.

There are places that do really well on the exams. A group of suburbs west of Chicago had their students combined and rated as though they were a country. They were tops  on the exam (called themselves First in the World Coalition). Of course it helped that they were affluent suburbs.

For an example at the high school level recall Stand and Deliver. 

[marshwiggle]

There is a wealth of research on why the US i where it is in the rankings. Look at the many TIMMs reports.

One obvious answer is teacher prep and expectations in the classroom. The best explanation in my opinion.

Interthreaduality- One large study of videos of representative classrooms showed a striking difference in the teacher expectations contrasting the US, Germany and Japan. The Japanese classrooms had much fewer questions asked and discussed, but at a much higher level. All students were expected to create theiR own solutions. Germany had a much lower level, the US even lower. When a student asks how in the US the teacher immediately showed them how; not in Japan.

The Asian countries as well as Hungary and the Eastern bloc nations all focused on higher levels  of concepts along with that expectation. Please also note the Asian countries required more days of school, and after school tutoring on skills and rote material is a cultural expectation.

The US math educators have been arguing for student "productive struggle" to be the classroom norm for 40 years to little avail.

Why is that? If it's a partisan thing, then there should be a clear distinction between areas that support the math educators and those that don't based on political affiliation. If there isn't, then it's something deeper.

It has nothing to do with politics. apl68 is right on the mark below.

I agree. And this is what I mean by education policies being driven by ideology, not pedagogy. (Note: Ideology, "a system of ideas and ideals", does not have to be partisan.) Those societal low expectations apl68 pointed out are baked in culturally, and no-one wants to take them on, at least if they want to stay employed.

What makes students learn is no secret; why students need to do the hard work to learn is the topic that can't be meaningfully discussed.

[Wahoo Redux]

Nice try, Marshy.  Keep trying to come up with a rationale.