ART Teachers, Music Teachers, Home Ec. Teachers, Voc. Tech. Teachers, P.E. Teachers
Not Core Curriculum...Not Tested in standardized Tests....Not Needed!!!!
Teaching has stressed and is still stressing the importance of core subjects. The core subjects have always included Math, Reading, Literature, Science, and Social Studies. The adoption of the 'Iowa Core Curriculum' and '21st Century Skills' again reforces the importanc of core subjects. In-service programs and faculty meetings are planned for these core subjects because that it what the state is testing students in (ITED, ITBS). NCCLB is evaluating schools on these scores in the core areas. Why are school districts even waisting tax payers money on the special classes such as art and music? The monies used for those 'extra' classes would provide valuable time and services to students that would help directly test scores. Student/teacher ratios would be smaller, more technology could be purchased and used, and the entire curriculum could be fine tuned. What are we waiting for ... get the pink slips out!!!
Or are these extra classes Important to students and their education? Do they engage students who would quit school ? Do the classes seem more differentiated? Do the classes teach something not evaluated in standardized tests...creativity?
Ok, you asked for it...I know you are just poking the proverbial stick here, but consider this option...
ReplyDeleteNCLB is indeed concerned with the amassing of knowledge and understanding in the core areas - given.
Money is incredibly tight in education and does not appear to be getting any better any time soon - given.
Parents and community still see a value in the arts, vocational classes, and electives - given in most cases.
Educators have frequently identified that the "other" curriculum is beneficial for a well rounded student and actually promotes better learning in the core subjects - I'll buy into that too.
Now the thought...What would happen if schools were expected to provide (hire teachers, plan schedules, create curriculum, secure technology, etc.) the core to students and assess on these areas with the option of families "buying" the additional classes and activities. Normal taxes would still need to apply, but now students and families would have options to "expand" where they feel the need. You want a Painting class...$150. A PE class...another 50. How about that Foods class...another $150. And while we're at it, maybe the $350 for the volleyball season and $450 for basketball (longer season). Buying yourself a fully rounded education...priceless. That's not bad...$1150 for a semester of extending learning and opportunities.
Now, who hires the teachers, access to schools, making the team, scholarships, and teacher load will probably be those pesky little things that would need to be worked out in the future. Oh heck, let's give it a sarcastic try...
Interesting ideas.... sounds like a type of voucher system. If everyone has the same amount of voucher money to spend the problem may not be as big...except if a small rural school can not offer the range of choices as a larger school district. Does this sound familiar already? The question might be asked "Why do core classes not include creative options such as art, music, drama?" How would a school that did operate and what would the test scores show?
ReplyDelete