We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum. CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.
The concern I see about vo-tech is that you can end up using your educational years to train for a specific job that may become obsolete. Algebra and writing skills do not become obsolete.
No, but jobs requiring them --- like tech writing or software engineering or tech support --- can easily be outsourced. Skills for these jobs can become obsolete more quickly than skills used by plumbers, electricians, auto mechanics, and the like. And their jobs can't be outsourced.
I agree with you completely about switching from manufacturing jobs to service jobs. It suits big businesses but has played a big role in damaging the middle class. IMO, part of the everyone-must-get-a-BA frenzy stems from this problem.
However, there's something to be said for feeling concerned about the fact that THOSE WHO TAKE THE SAT are not college-ready. If it was "those who graduate from high school," the bits about vo-tech, technical degrees, etc would be more relevant.
What percentage of students take the SAT but do not then attend college? Anyone know?
I addressed this very briefly yesterday with someone else, so I happen to have some info handy.
One of the most distressing things IN that report, imo, was that some 42% of the students who scored below that 1550 combined benchmark had taken "advanced" high school coursework... AP/honors.
Agreed!
As mentioned on another recent thread, the news media creates high school rankings which most currently are based on providing more students with access to advanced courses and exams. To gain top ratings high schools are providing advanced courses and exams to ever larger percentages of their populations without regard to student readiness or ability. Once set in motion, this Rube-Goldberg-esque educational machine calls for a structure which then improves the readiness and ability of those students. I believe the specific target groups of students are those eligible for free and reduced lunch, ethnic minorities, undocumented immigrants, those whose parents did not attend American college/university.
Some of the called-for improvement can be compatible with gifted ed... for example attitudinal approach of the growth mindset can be of benefit to all and need not be costly to implement. Parents can do this at home. Posted recently on another thread, a link to a youtube video of Carol Dweck.
The concept of fixed mindset vs growth mindset is nicely summarized in these youtube videos: Ashley Merryman & Po Bronson: The Myth of Praise (link- ) and Teaching a Growth Mindset (link- ) by Carol Dweck whose research was mentioned in the Bronson video clip. These links provide quick summaries, their books contain more info. One aspect or application of a fixed mindset is that gifted kids, in order to be seen as "right" or "smart", may stop taking appropriate risks, possibly shunning a challenge and preferring easy work which may represent a level of underachievement. A fixed mindset may work against them and be exhibited as a lack of resilience.
Uh, I'm just skimming the Board's report but it looks like Mr. Richwine (wasn't there a scandal about this guy?) is not being forthright. I don't see where "The College Board offers some speculative reasons about why some students are college-ready and others are not." Actually, I don't see any direct claim that "college-ready students took more AP tests" or that "more college-ready students took the PSAT." Might have missed it. He's correct about "more college-ready students completed a “core curriculum," but of course, that's not the same as Common Core, which we all know is a new thing.
What the report does say is that students who scored higher on AP tests also scored higher on the SAT, and that students who scored higher on the PSAT score higher on the SAT. Duh. And it tries to sell us the value of the PSAT as an early indicator. But I don't see ANY claims that taking the PSAT or taking AP exams makes you get a higher score on the SAT.
Again, I'm just skimming, but from where I stand this look like like poor journalism from the National Review.
I do suspect that some of that conflation core/common core on the part of CB is not accidental.
After helping write English Language Arts standards that will be used in 46 Common Core states, David Coleman is going to head College Board, which controls SAT and AP exams.
Oh, and by the way, College Board helped to WRITE Common Core. A salient fact that they apparently aren't happy to have public at this point in time. LOL.
It's been taken down in the past week, but it used to be at
and is now viewable as a cached snapshot here instead.
Quote
The SAT and the Common Core State Standards
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) have been designed to provide a rigorous learning platform that prepares our nation’s students to perform in the classroom, to succeed in college and to prosper in their careers.
The College Board has been a consistent advocate and committed collaborator in the development of the Common Core State Standards. Our organization helped draft the original College and Career Readiness Standards, provided feedback on the K–12 standards and served on the advisory group that guided the initiative. The College Board is committed to helping states and districts understand how to implement these new common standards.
The SAT is aligned as well or better to the Common Core State Standards than any assessment that has been developed for college admission and/or placement. The College Board will continue to invest — and is committed to building deeper alignment — to ensure the SAT reflects the key components of the CCSS.
Completing core course work and participating in advanced courses plays a significant role in academic performance, affecting not only SAT performance but other measures such as GPA and graduation rates. In the long run, if we are going to achieve our college completion goal of 55 percent of Americans holding a college degree by 2025, we must ensure that all students — including traditionally underserved minority and low-income students — complete core course work and have access to the most rigorous courses possible. We are confident that the Common Core State Standards will help achieve that goal.
Lalalala... nothing's ever gone on the internet, folks.
I don't see where "The College Board offers some speculative reasons about why some students are college-ready and others are not."
This may be like reading something in a thread here on the board and then mentioning it later without providing the reference because it seems to be common knowledge in the current audience? It is my understanding that the College Board has been making statements about SES as related to college readiness. Rather than being a strictly causal relationship in which higher more $ = higher achievement, there may be a variety of contributing factors, including whether parents picked up a bit of knowledge about what parents can do to support and encourage their children, by experiencing this support from their own parents... this may have been missing in some families. Carefully following the interrelated issues through the web of research and discussion over several years may reveal why first-generation-college-attendees may be a focus for post-secondary intervention.
A concern may be whether the benefactors of this investment will then internalize what they've learned (e.g. The support services which have been provided to me can serve as my role model of how I can take responsibility for my future family and provide educational support and encouragement to my children) or by contrast not become internalized but rather become a multi-generational-dependency upon the system (e.g. If I do not provide educational support and encouragement to my children, the system will step in and do it for me/them.) Providing the services without teaching the growth mindset may therefore lead to entrenched multi-generational legacy of a sense of dependence/entitlement.
It reviews the profits of the CB and how they are profiting from the trend to get everyone to take an AP course so they are exposed to college level work
I don't doubt it, and I don't think the College Board is blameless by any means. I'm sure they're in it to win it.
I just don't care for Richwine's piece. It's misleading. You don't actually need to be misleading to point out some issues here--HK has just done so.
And the thing about business is that they can make decisions in their own best interest, and if it all fails, they just jump to the next company. They don't take any oath of office or "do no harm".
Agreed! Looks like a possible lack of ethics and accountability. Yet without the government backing for Common Core, this may be without power or influence.
Originally Posted by master of none
I so wish that this whole system could be dismantled and rebuilt from scratch. As it is now, everyone depends on everyone else to maintain and improve profits. Makes it hard to trust anyone about common core, SATs or anything else. Just a paper chase now.
Fortunately taking the SAT is not compulsory. People do it because everyone else is doing it. Some children take it because they love a challenge, others take it so they do not fall behind, and some take it so they may get ahead. Yet when they get ahead, the system providing the test may cry foul, claiming they want equal results for all, and may even provide penalties for all members of a demographic whose representative students outperform others. What becomes the point of the test?
In a free market of capitalism, people can respond to a possible conflict of interest or burgeoning monopoly by withholding their dollars. Portfolio, anyone? As intelligence becomes passé and may be written off as so much book-learning, more individuals may wish to distinguish themselves by showcasing what they can DO with what they've learned... how they can apply their skills and self-knowledge in various arenas.
An enterprising capitalist may also wish to harness the current concerns surrounding the educational system, MOOCs, accreditation, etc and create competition, investing in entering the market with a new high-school completion testing and academic credentialing service. Acting independently may create a viable product/service. For example, greek yogurt took the yogurt world by storm.
I believe the specific target groups of students are those eligible for free and reduced lunch, ethnic minorities, undocumented immigrants, those whose parents did not attend American college/university.
Do you have a source for that? In the specific context of high school rankings?
NCLB tracks performance for several at risk categories (racial minorities, limited English proficiency, socio-economically disadvantaged, special needs) so that data is readily available.
The federal government defined socio-economically disadvantaged as eligible for free/reduced price lunch, but states seem to be free to extend that (California uses free/reduced price lunch or neither parent graduating high school).
But I doubt anybody is keeping hard data on undocumented immigrants right now, since it is such an extremely sensitive subject (Plyler v. Doe, the recent fight around laws in Alabama and Georgia that required public schools to ask about the immigration status of their students).
And I have no idea where anybody would get the data on whether parents attended an American University. When I signed up my kids for public school parental education levels were self-reported with no box to put in where those degrees came from. Nobody asked me for my transcripts.
