Hard News: Standards Matter
414 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 17 Newer→ Last
-
Heh, in fact, Language Log eviscerates Orwell:
So, Orwell writes "it is generally assumed", which is passive. Why didn't he say "people generally assume", or "we generally assume", both of which are perfectly grammatical, are one word shorter, and are not passive?
-
As the sign at the Reader's Digest Condensed Books convention said:
"Brevity is ... wit" -
Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood
Clean from my hand? No; this my hand will rather
The multitudinous seas incarnadine,
Making the green one red.Shakespeare mixes it up
-
Jeremy Andrew - this applies to cartoons.
-
With extraordinarily wonderful effect Cecelia!
There's enough blood on her hands (she thinks) to render those green northern seas (they can also look that colour far south) red - and it is an especial hue of red. Fitted to blood.
-
Orwell never had to contend with double paste error. Bet he'd be a great tweeter, but.
-
One thing I noticed about boys when I was a teacher was that they really got into words. Generalisation - but it was a way I could connect with boys. It was a sort of counterbalance to being a gushy, girly overenthusiastic English teacher.
But Orwell has a point too, eh?
-
OK guys, too easy. If anyone's interested in getting back on topic, I'd like some help on how to respond to a curious invitation/ advertisement from the National Party in my local paper this evening -
"LIFTING EDUCATION STANDARDS
Come and talk to Hon Anne Tolley, your local MP, about how National Standards will help your child."
When and where: 6-7pm tomorrow, at the "Community Hall" of a local church.I have a dilemma or two - I no longer have school-age children, and even if I did, I'm unsure whether I could talk to her for a whole hour on the subject as defined. Of course it would be uncharitable of me to suggest she fails to meet basic literacy standards, by confusing "talk to" with "talk with", "ask questions of", or (heaven forfend) hear her talk to me for an hour.
So, should I go? And if so, what should I say? Let's assume it's really the traditional and I might get to make a two-sentence comment and ask one question - any suggestions?
-
Jeremy Andrew - this applies to cartoons.
How ironic, I stole it from the Simpsons :-)
-
"Brevity is ... wit"
Brevity is ... wot?
Thinking of the riches of language, James Joyce was never short of a word nor hesitant about inventing a new one. I sure would hate to read the short word version of Ulysses. I once read what I thought was Moby Dick until I realised it was the abridged version (the tuna version?). Then I found the giant, complete version.
We really need the Hon Dr Hayward to be part of this conversation. Where is he these days??
-
So, should I go?
Please do, Chris - I doubt you'll be expected to say much but what you experience can sure help others be better prepared.
I'd ask how these 'standards' achieve the results Tolley claims for them - and quote her published words about that in your question so she can't deny them. In short, how measuring the pig will help us all be fatter and smarter and happier. You know.
Supplementary - so how much new funding are you committing to invest responding to what these tests reveal?
-
So, should I go?
You really should. Pick a ripe question or two from those raised in this discussion, and sock it to her!
-
Geoff is brevier
-
Heh, in fact, Language Log eviscerates Orwell:
Maybe Orwell was trying to entangle rival writers into an obsession with petty grammar as a form of gamesmanship.
-
I will forever read and speak Dawkins word 'meme', in the correct latin, but with the meaning of the maori 'mimi' which is close enough in meaning and pronunciation for my purposes.
-
ChrisW, please go, and report back. 'Your child' can be read in the sense that it takes a village to raise one and we are all part of that community.
-
Just thinking - I could piss myself over that but - hey! Dried cut grass /suspended object round the neck/where do we go with this??!
-
OK, I'll go, and report back. Good ideas on the specifics - any others welcome.
And Gordon - on the shortest, most pertinent point in your long post -
2. No replies so far to my belief that our literacy rate does not depend on tests AFTER you get to school, but what happens BEFORE kids get to school - so we are defining the wrong problem, and therefore the wrong solution.
I note the example "Plunket graph" in the*National Party* pamphlet assumes that no child starts school at the beginning of year 1 more than "just below standard" but as the years go by there is great scope for them to fall "well below standard".
In fact, the "snapshot" graphic beside the "plunket graph" purportedly showing where one's child stands relative to the standard(s) shows neatly two child-figures per band on the scale well below, just below, at standard, just above and well above - clearly setting up an impression that despite the rhetoric these are conceptually percentiles, and the National party expects there to be 20% of children "well below standard".
So, clearly the National Party disagrees with your evidence-based view on the importance of the pre-school period, and the teachers are being set up. (IANAT)
-
If you agree that each of us has a different learning style and (hopefully) has a talent to be great at something, why not favour granting vouchers to allow you to c your dream and apply your talents ) whether they be in sport, music, journalism art or whatever?
How about because "I" am a child, with no particular hopes and dreams? "I" don't yet know what "I" want, except maybe to be a choo-choo train*? It's a fallacy to suggest that vouchers would help children to make choices. They might help parents to make the choices for their children. Sometimes these interests might align (temporarily), but indulging child/parent fantasies probably isn't what the state expects in return for the money it shells out.
* I do have to admit that choo-choo train academy would be pretty awesome
-
I note the example "Plunket graph" in the*National Party* pamphlet assumes that no child starts school at the beginning of year 1 more than "just below standard" but as the years go by there is great scope for them to fall "well below standard".
Also, looking at the graph...what happens at year 5 when there is a sudden break in the curve both up and down? Year 1 everyone is in the shade and inside 1 level. By the time Year 8 turns up they are spread over 2 1/2 levels.......
And we haven't even started....
-
why not favour granting vouchers
Practical rather than principled on this. I am given to understand that vouchers have not worked any more than these 'standards' have where they have been tried overseas. Again, no refs.
-
I do have to admit that choo-choo train academy would be pretty awesome
Oh, I think children's literature teaches us otherwise.
In fact, it turns out that Tootle may be quite instructive to the current debate.
-
No replies so far to my belief that our literacy rate does not depend on tests AFTER you get to school, but what happens BEFORE kids get to school - so we are defining the wrong problem, and therefore the wrong solution.
I call bullshit on that. One of my daughters is struggling to learn to read. We're highly educated, both to doctoral level (and mine in humanities at that), we both read constantly, I read to each of our daughters the day they were born, and most days since, I have done all the reading work with my girls, we are regulars at the local library, and still my daughter is struggling (aged 8). She is a quirky learner and a quirky thinker, but one with excellent reasoning skills. I've tried to get schools to give her extra help, I've tried to explain that she is a non-standard thinker, and the answer I've got back? "Well, she's achieving within the range we expect for x year olds." She's not a phonetics reader, not a whole language reader... she does something else entirely, and the schools can't cope. They couldn't cope in NZ, and they can't cope in Australia.
I've done some horrendous jumping up and down at my girls' school this year, and I'm planning to accost her teacher tomorrow morning, to find out exactly what's happening this year.
As for what I'm doing myself? At present I'm reading Famous Five books with her. It's all about on-going practice. She reads a page (with a fair amount of help), I read a page. She enjoys the story, because really, she's over the kind of stories you get in basic readers, and she gets the critical on-going practice in reading.
Also, at just 8, she's able to discuss the gender roles in them, and pick out the classism.
The school system does just fine, and can do just fine, for standard kids, even standard bright kids. I've got two of them, and they're both doing well. But it can't cope with unusual children, at all.
(Edited to fix html)
-
I definitely agree that parents can help, and their absence of support can hinder. But a loaded round of blaming does nobody any good.
Some people just learn differently and take a while to get there, and some just reach the level they get too and don't get past that. Either is fine. We're humans, after all, not clones.
My brother took a long time to speak, read, and write. My family has a few doctors in it, and they wondered if there was anything underlying it. It just turned out that he took a while to get up to speed.
-
I always rooted for Tootle, with such stories at school all I wanted to do was get outside.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.