FT: Special Committee on Education

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

This is a little late, but I think computer programming should be taught in elementary school along with art/music and require at least a year in middle and high school.

I could support increasing the requirement for Middle School students to one year, but I think requiring six-year-olds to take a computer programming course is a little onerous. Elementary schools would be free to introduce such a program on an individual basis, of course, but I don't think it should be mandated by the region.

Yeah, I just meant computer skills more broadly for K-5 students:  this includes basic programming (on the lines of click/drag programming languages like Scratch) as well as word-processing, safe social media use, research skills, etc.   But perhaps it doesn't need to be as frequent as art/music.

With respect to middle school, 1 year is good.  I do think a course in high school introducing the fundamentals of computer science, as well as the fundamentals of web design would also be useful for people.

[ASPN]

This is a little late, but I think computer programming should be taught in elementary school along with art/music and require at least a year in middle and high school.

I could support increasing the requirement for Middle School students to one year, but I think requiring six-year-olds to take a computer programming course is a little onerous. Elementary schools would be free to introduce such a program on an individual basis, of course, but I don't think it should be mandated by the region.

Yeah, I just meant computer skills more broadly for K-5 students:  this includes basic programming (on the lines of click/drag programming languages like Scratch) as well as word-processing, safe social media use, research skills, etc.   But perhaps it doesn't need to be as frequent as art/music.

With respect to middle school, 1 year is good.  I do think a course in high school introducing the fundamentals of computer science, as well as the fundamentals of web design would also be useful for people.

Those seem like reasonable suggestions. Keep it simple in elementary, then get more specific in middle school. And maybe more advanced in high school. Maybe keep the high school one optional.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Updates as per RFayette's suggested changes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I will give 24 hours for objections to the proposed Educational Standards (see above post), after which point we will proceed to the next item on the agenda.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Alright, let's move on. Since we just finished talking about curriculum standards, we'll now proceed to the methods by which we confirm that these standards are being met; namely, testing. Questions to consider:

                  (1) What should be tested, how, and with what frequency?
                  (2) How should the region respond to test averages, particularly low averages?
                  (3) Should parents be able to "opt-out" of tests on their children's behalf?
                  (4) What is the appropriate role for standardized testing in the broader curriculum?

I'm interested to hear the committee's thoughts on the matter.

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

My thoughts for testing would be the following:

1.  Mandatory reading test in 2nd grade (ability to read aloud and understand very basic prose) in order to pass to the next grade
2. Summative assessments on math, reading comprehension, and Language Arts yearly from Kindergarten to 8th grade
3. This above summative assessment should also incorporate social studies and science beginning in 3rd grade.  Foreign language should begin being tested in 6th grade, as K-5 learning should be based more on immersion rather than learning precise grammar/rules.

With the exception of the 2nd grade reading test, examination results may be used to hold a student back only if it is in conjunction with low academic grades.

In high school, end-of-course assessments should be given in Algebra 2, Biology, 11th-grade Literature and Composition, Chemistry, and Atlasian Government.  Passing these tests should be mandatory for graduation and can be retaken as many times as the student desires.

Opt-outs should not be allowed, except for profoundly mentally disabled students.

Standardized testing should play a moderate role in the broader curriculum.  The goal of these tests should be to ensure everyone has achieved a basic level of proficiency in the tested subjects.  Teachers should not feel constrained to only teaching the contents of the test because the syllabus should be limited/fundamental enough to ensure that teachers still have classroom discretion.  However, for the coursework-specific tests, the tests will have greater content coverage and also provide a greater degree of resolving power in order to show a greater distribution of performance.  Thus, for those specific courses covered by end-of-course assessments, teachers would be more likely to "teach-to-the-test" in the sense that these tests will be designed to cover an entire year's worth of specific material.  The motivation behind this approach is that knowledge of these domains is important - Algebra 2 is a strong predictor of success in calculus (and strengthens general numeracy skills), biology/chemistry comprehension in success in collegiate science courses and scientific literacy in general, and ensuring a uniformity in instruction for these important subjects so students in the state universities can be expected to share a common body of knowledge.

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

Any thoughts on the testing standards?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Standardized testing should play a moderate role in the broader curriculum.  The goal of these tests should be to ensure everyone has achieved a basic level of proficiency in the tested subjects.  Teachers should not feel constrained to only teaching the contents of the test because the syllabus should be limited/fundamental enough to ensure that teachers still have classroom discretion.  However, for the coursework-specific tests, the tests will have greater content coverage and also provide a greater degree of resolving power in order to show a greater distribution of performance.  Thus, for those specific courses covered by end-of-course assessments, teachers would be more likely to "teach-to-the-test" in the sense that these tests will be designed to cover an entire year's worth of specific material.  The motivation behind this approach is that knowledge of these domains is important - Algebra 2 is a strong predictor of success in calculus (and strengthens general numeracy skills), biology/chemistry comprehension in success in collegiate science courses and scientific literacy in general, and ensuring a uniformity in instruction for these important subjects so students in the state universities can be expected to share a common body of knowledge.

I strongly concur with the sentiment expressed here. Teachers need to have the latitude to adapt their curriculum to the needs of their students and their community, and onerous testing requirements can get in the way of that. For courses like Biology and Algebra, a more comprehensive ECA is advisable, but such should be the exception, not the rule.

I likewise agree with RFayette's proposals regarding the frequency and areas in which we should test students. My one objection would be to the requirement for yearly tests prior to 1st Grade. Unless these were very general examinations, I feel this would be both oppressive and futile; I'm having a hard time imagining 5 and 6 year olds taking an extended written exam. I could be misunderstanding the intended format, though, in which case I would be willing to reconsider my position.

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

Standardized testing should play a moderate role in the broader curriculum.  The goal of these tests should be to ensure everyone has achieved a basic level of proficiency in the tested subjects.  Teachers should not feel constrained to only teaching the contents of the test because the syllabus should be limited/fundamental enough to ensure that teachers still have classroom discretion.  However, for the coursework-specific tests, the tests will have greater content coverage and also provide a greater degree of resolving power in order to show a greater distribution of performance.  Thus, for those specific courses covered by end-of-course assessments, teachers would be more likely to "teach-to-the-test" in the sense that these tests will be designed to cover an entire year's worth of specific material.  The motivation behind this approach is that knowledge of these domains is important - Algebra 2 is a strong predictor of success in calculus (and strengthens general numeracy skills), biology/chemistry comprehension in success in collegiate science courses and scientific literacy in general, and ensuring a uniformity in instruction for these important subjects so students in the state universities can be expected to share a common body of knowledge.

I strongly concur with the sentiment expressed here. Teachers need to have the latitude to adapt their curriculum to the needs of their students and their community, and onerous testing requirements can get in the way of that. For courses like Biology and Algebra, a more comprehensive ECA is advisable, but such should be the exception, not the rule.

I likewise agree with RFayette's proposals regarding the frequency and areas in which we should test students. My one objection would be to the requirement for yearly tests prior to 1st Grade. Unless these were very general examinations, I feel this would be both oppressive and futile; I'm having a hard time imagining 5 and 6 year olds taking an extended written exam. I could be misunderstanding the intended format, though, in which case I would be willing to reconsider my position.

Fair enough; a kindergarten exam is probably unnecessary.   If we start testing at 1st grade (and give these assessments at the end of the year), most kids would be at least 7, which I believe is old enough to take a standardized test.

[ASPN]

Sorry for my quietness, never the less I think what you have is good. "Teaching for the test" has done for more harm than good for students and we need an improved system for sure.

[Barnes]

If I might be permitted to shout from Strangers' Gallery, I would argue that there is little difference in testing a child in kindergarten or first grade. If you must test at every grade, which I understand there might be some pedagogical detail to be gained, I would think more general oral or even artistic evaluations would be appropriate.

I would personally think that the third grade is the earliest where a traditional, booklet-like standardized test should be given. Hopefully, experience with individual assessments and classroom requirements will have prepared the student for the perceived pressure of that exam.   

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

If you must test at every grade, which I understand there might be some pedagogical detail to be gained, I would think more general oral or even artistic evaluations would be appropriate.   

This is a really interesting idea. Do you know of any schools where this method of examination is practiced? As an alumnus of several Montessori schools, I have some familiarity with innovative methods of examination, but these things tend to vary greatly from program to program and I'd love to see how it is done elsewhere.

[Barnes]

If you must test at every grade, which I understand there might be some pedagogical detail to be gained, I would think more general oral or even artistic evaluations would be appropriate.   

This is a really interesting idea. Do you know of any schools where this method of examination is practiced? As an alumnus of several Montessori schools, I have some familiarity with innovative methods of examination, but these things tend to vary greatly from program to program and I'd love to see how it is done elsewhere.

To be honest, I don't have any personal experience with Montessori-type schooling, but the principle is there. In my mind, grades K to 2 should be spent developing social and communicative skills among students while learning numeracy and reading abilities. Then by third, they should feel comfortable with both reading, math and social interactions to participate in more routine academic settings.

I also am a very strong proponent of arts and music throughout school education, so the more that can be included the better!

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Alright! With the new session of parliament underway, I figure it's time to revive this. The question on the floor is that of standard examinations in public schools. Earlier, RFayette submitted a draft proposal on the matter; it has been suggested (by myself) that the requirement for examinations of kindergarteners be struck, and (by Mr. Barnes) that we ought to explore the possibility of alternative testing methods for students of the younger grades.

As a reminder, all citizens of Fremont - not just MPs - are eligible to join this committee, so if you have something to say, speak up!

[ASPN]

Alright! With the new session of parliament underway, I figure it's time to revive this. The question on the floor is that of standard examinations in public schools. Earlier, RFayette submitted a draft proposal on the matter; it has been suggested (by myself) that the requirement for examinations of kindergarteners be struck, and (by Mr. Barnes) that we ought to explore the possibility of alternative testing methods for students of the younger grades.

As a reminder, all citizens of Fremont - not just MPs - are eligible to join this committee, so if you have something to say, speak up!

I don't know a lot about alternative methods of testing younger students, but the idea of waiting till at least 3rd grade before regular tests is something I could get behind.

Otherwise the main proposal given is fine with me.

[Barnes]

I think one of the biggest factors against testing at such a young age is the amount of stress which it places upon children at such a crucial moment of development and the fact that many cannot fully visualize the importance of such exams. And why should, to be quite honest? I will restate that developing social skills and creating a maximum level of comfort in dealing with school subjects both individually and in groups should trump what statistics could be gained about an eight year old.

We should ensure that all students have mastered literacy and numeracy by the second grade at the latest through exercises that draw out their creativity and interests. We can then build upon the confidence which they posses in their own abilities with increasingly "normal" examinations as they matriculate through the system.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I largely agree with Barnes on this issue. The main question, I think, is whether we want to prescribe the method(s) for alternative assessment in an Act of Parliament, or allow teachers and school districts to work it out for themselves.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Draft proposal for regional testing standards:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I omitted the proposed Foreign Language AEA, as I feel foreign language ought to be tested in the format of an ordinary final exam, designed by teachers according to regional standards. Keep in mind that this is a draft only, so if you see something that needs changing, don't hesitate to say so.

[Barnes]

I think this represents excellent progress. I will ask, though, on the decision to not require AEA for the natural sciences. I remember that in high school there was the option of not taking science courses for some grades but I wonder about the need for such a thing.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I think this represents excellent progress. I will ask, though, on the decision to not require AEA for the natural sciences. I remember that in high school there was the option of not taking science courses for some grades but I wonder about the need for such a thing.

Indeed, per the previously approved draft curriculum, students will be required to take at least three science courses (two of which must be Biology and Chemistry) over the course of their high school career. If you think it advisable, I would be happy to expand the Social Science AEA to cover the Natural Sciences as well.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Amendment to the earlier draft proposal, in accordance with the recommendation of Speaker Barnes:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Any further thoughts/suggestions, or are we ready to move on?

[ASPN]

I have no objections

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Seeing no objections, the draft has been adopted.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Alright, moving on! Is there any interest in launching a regionally-funded preschool pilot program? If so, who should be eligible for this program (all students, or only those from low income families)?

[Barnes]

Alright, moving on! Is there any interest in launching a regionally-funded preschool pilot program? If so, who should be eligible for this program (all students, or only those from low income families)?

Again, I am quite pleased with the the progress on this plan so far.

In my opinion, universal pre-school should be the aim. I do believe that preschool should be what it says, and not be school in all but name. Rather, a place for children to make their first experiences away from their families and learn to work with their peers in group settings.

Further, in my mind, as these will ultimately be decisions for the local level and the schools themselves, the programs should have an inherent natural focus. Ergo, physical activities in outside settings as much as possible. The time for staying in a classroom for several hours should be later in development.

What I think the Commonwealth can do is to establish a basic minimum framework of requirements and standards for both preschool programs and instructors. I, personally, do not feel the need to limit programs run outside of state schools. I personally attended preschool at a local Methodist church and had a thoroughly enjoyable time; although that was eighteen years ago, so it might just be happy memories!