Pressure > Test Scores

Increased rigor, a reduced amount of time and 15 end of course exams to pass.  Sure, and why not add more pressure by making the test count towards their actual class grade.  I am sure that adding additional requirements will “scare” students into taking things more seriously.

Hardly. I am not surprised that Governor Perry supported the schools rights to choose whether or not to implement this requirement. His track record shows that he does not have a firm understanding of what strategies will work best to encourage kids to perform better on standardized tests. Thankfully, he did agree with the decision to defer the rule for now.

I agree with Josh that it is possible the rule could go a couple of directions, but it is most likely that it will go one way. More students will crack under pressure. Test scores will go down and grades will as well. Yes, it is true that there are a few good test takers out there, but what about the majority of students who are not? What message is this sending to our students? You can work hard and make progress, but when it comes down to it, the only thing that truly counts is how well you can perform on a test?

Additionally, what message will this be sending to our teachers? No, sorry, please put away any creative and innovative ideas you may have. You need to get out as much test prep material as possible because those kids of yours have to pass that test. Oh and be sure to make sure they know the stakes! Wave that 15% threat over their heads so that they are sure to focus and take it seriously!
Come on. Let’s just abandon this idea now and avoid the unnecessary grief.

For the Love of Texas, Don't Say the "A" Word!

Well, on behalf of all women, let me personally thank you, Mr. Perry! It makes so much sense that a man would truly understand the needs of a woman and her body. Right? Hardly! I have to wonder if Governor Perry even stopped once to wonder what would be considered a win for Texas women.

Perhaps, access to basic available health care? The Planned Parenthood program reaches far and wide across Texas and enables women to make educated and supported decisions about their bodies and health. Continuing to provide women with options and access would in my opinion be the winning plan.

Planned Parenthood does not offer abortion services. This is a fact. Please give me a break that the mere mention of abortion is equivalent to promoting it. If this is really something that people are going to follow, what else could it apply to?

Good for Planned Parenthood for suing. I hope this case stands as an example of  how the government can go too far. Free speech was implemented for a reason: to protect citizens rights from unfair legislature control such this.

I find it interesting that the appeals court begrudgingly released the injunction. I would like to know more about their rationale for why they believe these actions do not violate the Constitution. It seems very hypocritical that free speech can be allowed for disfavoring abortion and the activities that promote abortion, but criticized and banned when the word abortion is said or an organization has an affiliation with the word.

So, Mr. Perry, I ask you this. How do the Texas women win when their rights are reduced and they lose access to their basic health care facilities?  Maybe you need to explain what game you are playing so that we can understand why you decided there was anyone who won here.

Cookies and Ice Cream for Education

Finally, an analogy that is meaningful and makes sense! I believe Cohen’s model should be shared and mass distributed throughout the nation, so that the general public could perhaps have a better basic understanding of how the legislator’s budget distributes its money. By visualizing a pile of cookies, it is very simple to see the imbalance that is occurring in our government spending.

An immediate image of Sesame Street’s Cookie Monster came to mind, perhaps representing the Texas legislators. Its seems more than appropriate that a big, blue, crazy puppet could represent the legislature since the proportions being handed out are extremely unbalanced. I agree that education is indeed getting the pieces of cookies that are left in the bottom of the cookie jar.
Perhaps Cohen’s example could be used to really emphasize to the public how far a few extra cookies could go. And likewise, how other areas would not starve from having some of their cookies redistributed. If the $6 billion dollar figure given by Lynn Moak is an accurate estimate of the amount needed to help schools, it wouldn’t even take one whole cookie to help make some much needed improvements.

The only thing I would be cautious about adding into this mix, is a property tax increase. I think it sends a mixed message to the public because we are trying to show them that the true villain is the legislature. I think it might make people feel as though we are turning the issue towards them to solve or fix it before we look closer at the root of the problem. We need to put focus on who stole the cookies from the cookie jar to begin with.

Cohen’s model is genius. It really does seem that the power of a cookie has the potential to educate and simplify some very complicated problems!

A lot of my posts thus far have been about education, so I thank Katy for finding this and giving me a chance to speak even further on something true to my beliefs!

Can you be more specific?

If we just had more money, we could solve the achievement gap! I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard this. I know for sure I would be a lot richer and certainly by now, if it were true, it certainly seems there would be some type of increase in the standards achievement by now.

After reading Kate Alexander’s article: Expert: Schools Need Additional $6 Billion a Year to Meet Higher Standards, I believe that districts need to have a clear focused plan in place before anyone can state a specific dollar amount that would be needed to assist in meeting the higher standards. I worry that without such details, dollars will be wasted and it won’t be long before we will be reading another story claiming that we just need a new additional amount of money to solve our crisis.

It really seems like smarter choices need to be put in place. Something is obviously not working. I don’t claim to be an expert in the area of education, however, I know from watching the news and talking with my teacher friends, there are many factors that need to be addressed. Parental involvement, effective teaching, quality of programs and materials, looking at places to actually cut costs and equality among schools are just a few that come to mind.

Can Ms. Moak provide the details about how she reached this estimated amount and can she explain how this money will directly impact the performance gap? I know there is evidence that shows low-income students do not perform as high on the new assessments, but is anyone stopping to look at what other personal struggles these kids are facing and what social programs will need to be in place to assist in this area as well? 

I agree we need to put more money into our schools, but this issue has multiple layers. Isn’t it about time we stop wasting valuable tax dollars and truly try to target a plan that utilizes every dollar the best way possible?

Health care in prisons

After reading through the many blogs posted in Grits For Breakfast, I stumbled upon one where the blogger is commenting on an article that was recently published in the Austin American Statesman.  It details a variety of proposed facts about the potential financial benefits of paroling prisoners for the sake of saving the government bundles of money in “unnecessary” medical expenses. As I read through the information presented, I became increasingly frustrated with the idea that prisoners with severe medical disorders and complications would have an ankle bracelet slapped onto them and be sent back into society without any type of plan or available resources.

As I reached the end of the commentary, I was surprised, given the blogger’s background, that there were minimal thoughts or comments about what complications this action could cause for the state and country as a whole. The author is very active in criminal justice politics and does research for reform. I expected him to provide more facts about the negative impact paroling could have on not just society, but on the inmates as well. Considering that this blog is directed to a liberal crowd, I believe others probably feel similar to me in this regards. It is complicated issue that needs to be weighed out more evenly.

The basic argument is clear. Inmates need and utilize health care. This is costly. If we can find a way to parole more of the inmates that are using this health care, the government can apparently save money. The more complex argument happens when you dig deeper and try to determine how exactly will it work. Will the parole board be qualified to decide who is eligible? Will federal funds have to compensate for the state funds that were previously funding the health care?

It appears that the evidence is definitely one-sided. I am sure people can see and agree that there are financial savings that can be accrued if the number of inmates who are paroled is increased. What seems to be lacking are the dollar amounts on the other side of the issue. How many parolees will be eligible for SSI or SSDI and what will be the cost of this expense? How much will it cost to run the nursing homes and what will the impact be on local hospitals? Lasly, what is the human impact?

This blogger’s conclusion left me with a lot of unanswered questions. I know this is a sensitive and difficult issue to tackle, but I truly expected he would have put a lot more passion and effort into his counter attack!

Red to Blue?!

I have to say, this article in the Statesman gave me a good chuckle.  First let me start off by saying....

Texas, a blue state? What a wonderful thought, but unfortunately about as likely as pigs flying. It is great to hear that more minorities are taking leadership positions and it does create a sense of hope among the Democratic Party, however, I am fairly certain it will take more than two Hispanic leaders to motivate two million people to register and participate in the election process. People need to believe that they have a voice and that they can truly make a difference. Hopefully, the Castro brothers will generate change and perhaps additional minority leaders will begin to take charge. When people start to actually feel the results of positive leadership role models, this is when they are typically motivated to reshape their thinking and are sometimes open to the idea that they might be able to contribute to their own continued success.

But the leap from red to blue is not going to take place in the near future. It is going to take multiple successful Democratic, minority leaders to continue to push the unregistered Hispanic citizens to get out their vote. Resources need to be put in place to continue to educate and assist people with understanding the value of their vote. Politics can be a tricky and confusing thing to manipulate and keep up to date with. Ongoing education about current propositions and laws that directly impact the citizens need to be routinely shared and explained. Having two positive and proactive Hispanic leaders is definitely a step in the right direction, but I wouldn't hold my breath!

How I see politics...

A recently published article in the Austin American Statesman caught my eye this weekend.  Having grown up in another state, I didn't get to experience the STAAR testing system but I have heard criticisms from a school teacher friend of mine.  The biggest criticism being that the test is designed for children on any spectrum.  Not all kids are on the same spectrum, so why should a test be?  It would be more comprehensible for this test to be administered not for grading purposes, but for testing purposes only.  Doing this early in the school year to see what subjects need to be covered to what extent would be much more beneficial than preparing children for college.  I wasn't aware that this was the main purpose of this testing system and I strongly agree with the author that it is not the way to go.  Not all children are headed toward a 4 or even 2 year degree, making this testing a waste of time and money on some.  It also adds to the peer pressure felt by students to attend such a school that offers 2 and 4 year degrees, deterring them from what they may really want to be when they grow up.