I agree with most of your points. However, I disagree with your thinking that he is not to blame for the drastic drop in some areas. He is most certainly to blame for a large portion of those drops. Ask the majority of your ELA teachers at the elementary level and they would agree that he is to blame for the drop in scores.
We were given novels that were "cheap" in terms of money rather than high in literary value. We were given curriculum guides that direct us to copy passages but no paper and ink to get the job done. We were given curriculum guides days before we were expected to start teaching from them. So much for planning and enhancing.
We were directed not to use the text book (which was due to be replaced years ago) because it lacked rigor yet we weren't given enough copies of the novels to use with the classes. I have also heard it was pretty much the same thing for the middle school ELA as well. And what occurred with our reading data last year? It dropped.
So, I disagree that he is not to blame for this happening. He is a huge part of the reason it happened. Had we been given the tools needed, we could have made great gains. However, you can't exactly teach a child to read without a book and that is exactly what was expected of us.
I know that the argument could be made that we have been given access to Achieve 3000 this year. However, we have always had access to some computer program that can be used to enhance instruction. I feel this is just another one of those tools. It still does not replace a quality novel or quality instruction. I just hope that next year, they take a serious look at the Reading curriculum because what we are currently doing is not getting the job done.
We were given novels that were "cheap" in terms of money rather than high in literary value. We were given curriculum guides that direct us to copy passages but no paper and ink to get the job done. We were given curriculum guides days before we were expected to start teaching from them. So much for planning and enhancing.
We were directed not to use the text book (which was due to be replaced years ago) because it lacked rigor yet we weren't given enough copies of the novels to use with the classes. I have also heard it was pretty much the same thing for the middle school ELA as well. And what occurred with our reading data last year? It dropped.
So, I disagree that he is not to blame for this happening. He is a huge part of the reason it happened. Had we been given the tools needed, we could have made great gains. However, you can't exactly teach a child to read without a book and that is exactly what was expected of us.
I know that the argument could be made that we have been given access to Achieve 3000 this year. However, we have always had access to some computer program that can be used to enhance instruction. I feel this is just another one of those tools. It still does not replace a quality novel or quality instruction. I just hope that next year, they take a serious look at the Reading curriculum because what we are currently doing is not getting the job done.
You said.....
ReplyDelete"" we have always had access to some computer program that can be used to enhance instruction. I feel this is just another one of those tools. It still does not replace a quality novel or quality instruction.""
I fear you are correct, but I also suspect somewhere in the recesses of some demented political party is the plan to save money and go to an online format. Replace teachers with clerical staff who man schools of computer labs.
We are quickly moving in that direction with all major tests being computer based, mandatory (and unnecessary) online course requirements, and many if not most remediation being computer based.
Welcome to the 'Brave New World". Wait that was a book. Strike that last comment from the record. Then click 'ENTER"