“Prof. Harold Pollack, a University of Chicago public health researcher, said the study is important and highlights the challenge – and need to – create “a much larger number of schools that serve kids well.”
Pollack said better academic performance among the charter school kids is likely more important for their long-term health than their risky behaviour choices.
“Educational outcomes are just so critical for people’s well-being,” he said.”

So few studies connecting the academic performance to the student’s well-being. It became a concern to prove to the educrats that it was not at all foolish to focus on the achievement of my youngest child via through the improvement of the 3 Rs. LD students are at the top of the list for students being at high risk for risky activities that impacts health negatively. As a parent, I had the typical visions of her dropping out of school to taking drugs to serious mental health problems. As my child’s academic performance improved, she became more confident and capable in producing good academic work and as I saw it in real time, less likely to engaged in risky activities. As for my negative visions of the future of my child, they slowly receded but not entirely forgotten because I was reminded from time to time of other students who had dropped out, engaging in high risk activities who all shared the lower academic performances of students with weaker levels in the 3 Rs and gaps in their knowledge banks.

This is so very true and should be the primary focus of schools - “Educational outcomes are just so critical for people’s well-being,” he said.”  If I had not intercede for my child, I am sure my now adult child would not have a bright future with all the open doors to choose from.

I also feel that studies like this contribute to what we know about the positive effects of quality education. I’m trying to find a copy of the study, itself, to read more closely some of the design and stats coming that emerged.

The article referenced above also cautions, “The study doesn’t prove that the schools made the difference and it has limitations that weaken the results, including a large number of students who refused to participate. “

I think that its important to consider what it is that the schools offered that may have contributed to the significant difference in self-reported involvement in risky behaviours.

Here is the abstract - http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/07/16/peds.2013-3573

One can come up with $12.00 for two days access. A bargain considering some of the rates I have seen.

The front page - http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/

Stephen, there’s no mystery here—when schools do a proper job of educating children, they’re happier and therefore don’t get involved as often in risky behaviour.

I’ve written this many times in blogs but I’ll do it again:  During the late 50’s and early 60’s, I went to one of the poorest schools in Windsor Ontario (which non-Windsorites consider an awful city).  There were very poor children whom I attended school with—some wore rags to school and in winter months had no boots (never mind proper nutrition).  We could all read and when I first moved there from the ‘burbs these poor students were way ahead of me in math.  There were city-wide exams in all subjects which had to be passed in order to go into the next grade.  The kids who failed were the bigshots because repeating the curricula was easy, plus they were usually physically larger, and also because of their size were superior in sports.  There was no such thing as a student who couldn’t read!  This public school had a fully-equipped science lab, a music room and a band, an art room, a library/auditorium,  a beautiful gymnasium.  There was little bullying because kids got the strap.  I also remember a teacher who was fired because he couldn’t tackle the grade 7 math.

Some of the children went on to great careers, and were they ever happy!  I remember the poverty they came from so it was great to see.

For the sake of our children’s future, we need to get back to proper teaching methods, exams and proper discipline.  This is what will get rid of a lot of the risky behaviour that we see nowadays.  We also need to get rid of useless bureaucrats and consultants in our educational system in order to be able to put the $$ back into schools where it belongs.

I believe there is a connection, but I’m wondering, along with the researchers themselves, what it is about these learning environments that might contribute. I thnink we still need to keep asking the important questions.

Why, for example, do 36% of the students in these “higher level” learning environments still report engaging in risky behaviours?

Why were the researchers concerned about the number of students who did not respond?

I think that, in spite of the positive results, we still need to adopt a sense of “mystery”. That’s just good research.

Stephen, with all due respect,  I would rather see educrats spend their time and effort on getting back to good curricula and direct instruction.  If the old texts were used again along with different, students,  regardless of their backgrounds, would learn. 
P.D. days could be eliminated if the above were done so the children would be given back two more weeks of school!
Why not research the old exams and see what kids were capable of handling before the departmental were scrapped?
Educrats need to focus on what they were hired to do—educate.  You’re all too distracted with ‘saving’ kids, and failing at your job.  There are other publicly-funded agencies who can help children who are engaged in risky behavior.

Correction:  should read, ‘If old texts from the 50’s were used along with D. I.,
students, regardless of their backgrounds, would learn.’.

Bev,

Your insight and frankness are a breath of fresh air.  I wholeheartedly agree that if the focus was put back on proper instruction, a decent curriculum and allowing teachers to teach, we might not be in the pickle we’re in today.

Thank you for your contributions to this post.

I would agree that, if student achievement is going to be the main/measured goal that determines school success, then that needs to be the focus.

The extra layers that have been added to schooling over the years are not the creation of teachers. In the same way, it isn’t their choice on whether they participate in bullying programs, character ed, etc.

If however, a more wholistic approach to education is what is desired, then these programs will likely stay.

An important conversation.

As much as these posts are appreciated, it boggles the mind that so many of the “educrats” have extra time to actually post. There just seems to be too much time on everyone’s hands, too much thinking and not enough doing. As a former Montessori instructor, it just amazes me that adults cannot fathom how much children like and respect STRUCTURE, which also encompasses discipline. Children of all age groups naturally feel better about themselves and the world around them when they learn and practice what they learn. Start listening and observing the children.  Bev has nailed it all. Quit trying to reinvent the wheel and start practicing.

I’m not an educrat (don’t even know what that is) but I’ve taken time from my two week vacation to be here.

For teachers (and I don’t see many here) schools are closed for the summer!

Stephen, why not look up the suffix, ‘crat’?

No need Bev! Found the definition here!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=educrat

Nice!

Hey Stephen, it is also in the Oxford dictionary. It is now considered a real word. The word was coined back in the 1990s to described the actions of the K to 12 establishment. Many different kinds of educrats at all levels of the K to 12. From the classroom educator to the CEO of a school board to the department of education. Come in all sizes and shapes. Most are experts in dismissing parents’ concerns, such as little Suzie is having learning difficulties or criticism of the curriculum. Look at the well-trained K to 12 at the national level and how the educrats can ignore WISE math, and continue on the pathway of advocating and encouraging disdain for the standard algorithms. Instead the educrats of the pedagogy kind, want students to reinvent the standard algorithms of old.

The pedagogy educrats are a unique breed among the K to 12 educrats. They are the ones that comes up for the reasons why standard algorithms is bad for students. Just have to look at the reasons why stacking numbers vertically is a no go - the edubabble is amazingly bereft of any logic, but that is if anyone cares to breakdown the edubabble.

That said the Urban definition best describes the educrat - ” It describes a special kind of person in the education world: pinheads who are so process-oriented that they are more excited in the process of learning than the myriad wonders that can be learned.”

That’s exactly why I use the term ‘educrats’; besides, since most are in lockstep with one another, it saves typing administrators; trustees; teachers; burearcrats; and teachers’ unions. 

Of course there are exceptions, but they’re a weak voice.

Bev,

The weak voice are the parents.  To have a voice you have to go where it is heard.  And posting on a blog is not your most effective venue- especially a blog with self determined outcomes.

Tara,

I am on an age to share your disappointment with the curriculum progression.  The door to stupid ,agenda driven, politically expedient curriculum reform was opened by Mike Harris.  And the slide to silly has been astonishing with each subsequent provincial government in Ontario.

How can well meaning parents and advocates stop the decay?

1. Become trustees
2. participate in local school councils

The system has tanked because the parents and grandparents are missing from the discourse. 

Malkin,

These effective high schools you write about are a direct result of effective teachers hired by a principal who gets education.  Focus on the Principals they are the key. 

Momnipotent, the system didn’t tank with Mike Harris.

Momnipotent, I think you can’t imagine the difficulties of parents’ voices being heard over the din of the K to 12 crowd. The K to 12 have a hard time in conceiving the parent of a grade 1 student without a deep background in education wanting her child to be assessed for learning difficulties. However, the classroom educator is not buying the observations of the parent, and sees no need to start the process for an assessment. The parent is sent home. The child does not get the help. Three years later, the child is assessed and the teachers are ever so surprised that the child has been identified as having LD.

The above story, is a dime a dozen in the K to 12 schools. Parents whose voices have been cut out of the conversations in schools. In fact, if a parent dares to raise their voice, it is often perceived to be a threat by the school, and the police are called in. There is hundreds of stories by parents who can attest to it, plus thousands upon thousands of other stories of parents swearing to the deliberate and calculated actions of the K to 12 administrators to poke parents until they become very angry, and do raise their voices. I can attest to it, and there was more times I had bitten my lips while my child was being denied accommodations she is entitled to under the law based on the reasoning she was either too smart or too dumb.

As for local school councils and school trustees, there is just as many stories and news articles attesting that they work for the best interests of the K to 12 and only for them. All hell breaks loose if they dare to discuss the taboos such as curriculum or reading instruction. Worst yet, having a parent council urging parents to download the offerings of SQE. Even worse, having strong advocacy for the children with disabilities, that they too received a quality education that is far above what is currently being received. The K to 12 are perfectly happy and contented to ensure that students with disabilities stay at the bottom of the achievement chart while Aboriginals are second from the bottom.

As for principals, they are part and parcel of what some will call the traffic cops - the gatekeepers to control the traffic flow no matter what the classroom educators are saying. One hasn’t seen anything until one meets the traffic cops at the school board level. Some fun time when a parent is requesting a look see into their child’s school file. The chances are the parent won’t get to look at it, and as a discovered quite by accident, my child’s file was sitting at the school board. Confirmed by my child’s educators who use to give me puzzle looks when I urge them to review her grades over the years and her psycho-educational assessments. They had to depend on my records.  Why was the file sitting at the school board level?  Parents have been wondering about that one for years. I suspect as the legal beagles have noted that the files retained by the school board represent the files that will bring them the most headaches in lawsuits and liability.

Having gone through some of which Nancy describes here when raising my parental voice in concern towards my children’s school, I can only say, “yup” to what she describes here.  Schools and the like do NOT want to hear from disgruntled parents, or heaven forbid if a parent actually tries to advocate for the child!  That child is “labelled” for their entire schooling career as having a meddlesome parent.  Trust me, I’ve been there.  I’ve also been involved on my children’s PAC council for years, and they most decidedly try and stay in support of the status quo.  Those at the school level have no power to change the way things are run anyways.  And in terms of acting as a school trustee, I was told by our Superintendent that they are completely handcuffed in terms of making changes that parents have been complaining about, and those that they have heard about in droves.  Squawking to the education establishment won’t amount to anything until we get the higher mucky muks involved.  And even then, it’s like wading through mud walking backwards in order to be heard.

Which is why I started our BC math petition.  That is seeming to attract at least a bit of attention by our educrats and our politicians.  How do I know?  Because I’m receiving daily emails from parents and other taxpayers to say thank you for trying to make a difference in getting their voices and their stories heard.  It’s not all positive, as some in the education establishment have already indicated their displeasure, but that’s okay.  At least we’re getting their attention.

But we’ve a long way to go to draw attention to the ineffective methods being used in our classrooms today.  Which is why blogs and organizations like SQE are invaluable as it provides support and encouragement for other parents and taxpayers to possibly say something at a school council meeting, or nudge a parent into volunteering for a position with COPACS or another school organization.  Parents are just beginning to understand the power of their voice, but it’s a long, hard slog, as other parents and grandparents such as Tunya and Nancy can attest to here.

Tara,

please know that I have fought the same fight advocating for my children and their peers.  The difference may be that I built a team of parent talent that moved mountains.  We took over the school council and then moved board policy.

The ground shifted because the paradigm shifted.  It was not one self serving parent advocating for their own child it was a team of parents asking really tough questions on how the community was served.  We cleared out the parent council that was ignorant of their responsibilities, we replaces the trustee with a member of our team , and there was a two year period where we had a 45 minute response time from our superintendents on our emails….Now if that sounds simple please know that it was not.  It was horrible, confrontational, whisper campaigns galore.  It worked because there was a core group of 8 with thick skin and real aversion to ‘no’. 

My posts continue to press for real dialogue in the arena that matters - our local edu-reality.

SQE is valuable and has been an incredible resource for our little band of rebels.  But the information has to be taken local-  this means anyone here who is frustrated by the disparity of what could happen and what does happen needs to become a school council member, a trustee, or a local community organizer that supports a team that will effect change.

Tara, the noneffective classroom methods that are frequently cited are interesting.  The diatribes assume that teachers are stupid.

Could it be:

1. The hiring practices in Ontario?  In a hiring climate where there is a surplus of 10,000 individuals to fill teaching positions how hard can it be to find a competent candidate?  Not hard if you are looking for a competent academic leader.  BUT WHAT if the principal is a bit confused and is trying to find someone who can coach basketball and also be “able” to teach grade 10 math?  Now the criteria has shifted from the academic requirements to the coaching requirements.  I know that the competent and efficient math teachers in my circle cannot be basketball coaches…..so they are out.  But everyone should be pleased to hear that the basketball team has an excellent season.

2.  Resources.  Departments are starved of materials while principals buy hockey jerseys for the team…...

When you actually listen to good folks in education you will hear AUDIT….. the money does not make it into the classroom

The only way some of this sorted out in real time so that it makes a difference to the children is that knowledgeable opinionated smart folks get to the
edu-table.  And you are the most lethal when it is a conversation about the community and not your own children.  Now the other side cannot dismiss and must engage.

Momnipotent - I don’t quite believe you. Here is why -  “It was not one self serving parent advocating for their own child it was a team of parents asking really tough questions on how the community was served.”

Self-serving parents gives it away. Parents who are not teachers do not described other parents as being self-serving. It certainly is a guarantee a teacher-parent will describe other parents as being self-serving if the parents are not advocating and working towards the same goals of the educators and by extension, the K to 12 establishment.

One can read all about under school culture, the education political files, the research in teacher bias to the research and books on teacher-parents who have the access keys and the inside-knowledge to obtain the hidden education services and resources for their children. Then, there is always the observations by millions of parent throughout the web, stating in one form or another,  that schools operate according to the learning needs of the teachers’ kids. If one of the teachers’ kids had LD, the other LD students would benefit, but and there is always the but, as the studies have shown the teachers’ kids are the only ones that have access to the education services beyond the classroom. Lots of research in the US and more so since the IDEA laws have emerge, what is a rarity at a due-process hearing is a teacher-parent serving notice to the school board on the behalf of their child.

PS - The last thing that the K to12 would like to advocate for, is a forensic audit for a K to 12 school district let alone for the entire K to 12 of a province. Nor have parents on a school council, using their skills to take apart the operations of a school. As parents we soon find out how monies in special education are redirected to the general funds, or how funds are redirected from general funds to be spent on the nice-to-have items but not relevant to student success and achievement.  P4E has also noted it as well in their reports, that school councils are not even entitled to have a detail account on the expenditures of a school.

Just some of the reasons why I don’t believe you Momnipotent. Teacher-parents have advantages that non-teacher parents do not have. Last time I check, the teachers are loath to discuss the advantages they have to advocate for their children. Nor reveal their trade secrets…....

ANOTHER REASON TEACHERS DON’T SEE THE SAME UNRESPONSIVENESS . . .

“The authors reveal that it is teachers themselves —not just their union representatives —who stand opposed to school reforms a majority of the public favors. In many ways this points to a much larger problem with improving our schools.” —Eric A. Hanushek

We’re talking about the book — Teachers versus the Public: What Americans Think about Schools and How to Fix Them.

The book shows a strong divide between how the public & parents perceive public education and how teachers do.  Teachers find fewer faults with the schools than the public does.  One review already pointedly concludes:  Why should the teachers find fault? Their good pay, benefits, pensions and job security says they are in a good spot.  Why should they care if the public is not satisfied?

Well, here is another reason teachers like the public school system.  They, unlike other parents, do not suffer the obstacles ordinary parents do when trying to obtain services and responsiveness.  As insiders, they know all their rights (which BTW most parents don’t) and they know how to wangle all they need on behalf of their own children.

Please see the 15 advantages Teacher-Parents enjoy that Ordinary Parents do not in our public schools (BTW, there’s more than 15, but that’s all I codified so far):

Teachers as Parents are Hugely Advantaged – Unfair
http://www.parentsteachingparents.net/?s=snarky

[Thanks Nancy, for articulating some of these points so well in your comments above. TA]

Nancy, in your post.  (07,29, 7:39)

How wonderful.  You don`t believe me.  Well god speed to twisting reality, twisting and twisting…...

Any one who checks the archives of this blog will see that it is a full time commitment on your part.  Crunching the numbers is not that difficult.  The number of posts and the length of them suggests that *this*  is your full time job.  But what are you accomplishing…... seems to me some sort of negative paralysis of anyone who is looking to sort out how to help their children in real time. 

progressive or regressive - that is the challenge.

Mirka, as a teacher you should know the difference between informed opinion and high rhetoric. I have no problem in providing the supporting evidence, and if someone should request it. Likewise, you should do the same in your contention that parents are self-serving. I could point you to the deep philosophical discussions on the web that clearly are defined by the Marxist and the non-Marxists crowd. Even Karl Marx had a problem with the self-serving bureaucracy of the professional class…....who would serve their own at the expense of the public they served. However, I am not going to provide the links because it is an easy find on the web. But I would be interested to know where you land on the Marxist political spectrum since you seem to think that all parents are self-serving but not the professional educators.

Momni—please leave my name out of your pseudonym. thank you.

Dear Doretta,

well said (08/01, 7:09).

your colors are self evident,

... I am embarrassed for you by the pettiness, in fact, I was embarassed three exchanges ago.  Some of us get stuff done real time, real world,  some us just posture in in this silly. 

best wishes, Potent.