jonathan byler on wed 13 aug 08
John,
the ACT and SAT tests actually do reflect how many people will
perform in college, often more so than the grades they get in high
school. Do they work for everyone? no, but for most people, they
seem to work. if they didn't, and colleges were consistently getting
poor performers with good numbers, they would either stop using the
tests as entrance criteria, or change the tests.
There is also a big difference to the ACT/SAT and the B.S. tests that
the no child left behind program is pushing. I think, to get back to
what lee was saying, that if you look at those districts or schools
where the ACT scores are the highest, you will also find the best
schools, where teachers actually do teach labs in physics, chem and
bio. You will find schools were art is not a one day a week affair.
you will find teachers who are given the resources to succeed. you
will also often find high property taxes and high teacher salaries,
and a greater number of teachers like yourself who actually give a damn.
most importantly, however for any elementary or secondary school
teacher, you will find parents who are engaged in their children's
education.
-jon
jon byler
3-D Building Coordinator
Art Department
Auburn University, AL 36849
On Aug 13, 2008, at 9:34 PM, John Post wrote:
> Lee,
>
> I am surprised to see you quoting ACT scores as any measure of the
> quality of a school district or educational experience. But I do
> agree that resources like good teachers with good salaries and ample
> budgets are more likely to produce a quality educational experience
> for kids than schools without these things.
>
> Here's a min-rant about standardized testing which then evolves into a
> few other topics...
>
> ACT scores are just a way for colleges to easily sort out the
> applications they get. Instead of actually learning about a candidate
> for the school they just look at some kid's numbers and decide whether
> or not he/she gets in. At least in the arts, schools often look at
> student portfolios instead of numbers.
>
> Why do students take the ACT? So they can get into college of course.
>
> All of our education system is designed to teach kids how to pass
> tests so they can get into college. It's like a giant freezer
> method. Here, put all this information in your brain when you are in
> 6th grade so you can pull it out and use it when you get to college.
> You won't actually have to demonstrate your understanding of what you
> learned, you can just show us by filling in the correct bubbles on a
> test sheet.
>
> We are always teaching kids what they are going to need to know for
> the next level, and the biggest next level of all is college. Why
> don't we ever teach them about stuff that they are interested in based
> on the age they are at right now?
>
> This year my son learned about Boyle's law of gasses in science. The
> teacher taught this by having the kids read about it from their
> science text, I am sure they were all riveted. A good teacher could
> bring this scientific law to life using props and doing experiments
> (12 year old boys know alot about gas), but when I asked my son's
> teacher about it, he said he didn't have time to do many experiments
> because he had to get through all of the curriculum. WTF?
>
> That's like saying I don't have time to really teach the kids because
> I am too busy getting through the curriculum.
>
> Of course this is all predicated on the assumption that he will need
> to know this to get into college so let's make sure we just jam it in
> his little freezer.
>
> The best treatise I ever read on education was written by an auto-
> mechanic. It's from Tom Magliozzi of the famous Click and Clack
> Tappet Brothers of NPR. You can read it here...
>
> http://www.cartalk.com/content/rant/r-rlast15.html
>
> As far as curriculum guides go, after reading it, I usually throw mine
> out. The schools I have worked for hired me because I am an artist
> and teacher. If an artist can't teach kids how to make art, who can?
> Most of the curriculum guides I have read are based on the principle
> "a mile wide and an inch deep". Let's just expose the little guys to
> a little of everything in the hopes that some of it sticks. My dad (a
> truck driver) had this to say about that theory "if you throw enough
> shit at the wall some of it is bound to stick".
>
> In my district some teachers feel that since the curriculum guide has
> weaving in it, that they must do a weaving project. So they do these
> paper strip weaving projects instead of actually weaving a basket or a
> rug or anything with real fibers. The kids usually throw them out
> before they even hit the hallway. So in theory the kids have met the
> curriculum and done a weaving project, but how much did they value it?
>
> If you make something in clay with a kid, the kids are always asking
> when they are going to get it back. I had a grandmother of a
> kindergarten student come in one time and show me the pinch pot she
> made when she was an elementary student. I asked her if she had any
> of her other school work from her elementary school days and it turned
> out the only thing she kept from 7 years at the elementary level was
> the tiny pot. It's amazing the effect that one little lump of clay
> can have on someone.
>
> The way I teach wouldn't work for every teacher, it really just suits
> me and my style, but here are some of my guiding principles...
>
> ~If I am not super pumped up about the lesson I am teaching, the kids
> won't be either. I have got to want to learn about it and do it as
> much as they do.
>
> ~Only work with authentic art materials. Drawing media, watercolor,
> tempera, clay and glazes. No milk cartons, no glitter, no wiggly
> eyes, no holiday art -ever. The kids need to work out 2-D and 3-D
> problems just like real artists do. I once heard one kid say to a new
> kid "In art class, first Mr. Post teaches us how to make a painting
> about something and then he teaches us how to make a sculpture about
> it." I never spelled it out like that for this kid, he just observed
> how things work relating to the way I delivered the curriculum.
>
> ~ALWAYS tell the kids the goal of each lesson. If they are learning
> about contrast, variety, cool colors or composition, tell them how
> they can show what they learned in their art work.
>
> ~Leave room in each lesson for the kids to embellish and add their own
> personality. As long as the kid has met the main goal of the
> assignment he/she is free to make other parts of it their own.
>
> I am not advocating that anyone else needs to take my approach to
> teaching or that because I do it this way that the way they are doing
> it isn't valid for them. Teaching is ultimately about people and
> relationships. I am an artist because I met a painter named Tom
> Parrish when I was in the last of the three different art programs I
> tried. If not for him, I probably would have given up on the arts. I
> loved his lectures about things that art students should do to become
> artists. It wasn't the painting curriculum that made me want to be a
> painter, it was the passion for painting that Tom Parrish delivered in
> his presentations and critiques.
>
> Can you tell I have a sinus infection and am spending more time on the
> computer than in the studio because of the achy-all-over feeling?
>
>
> John Post
> Sterling Heights, Michigan
>
> :: cone 6 glaze website :: http://www.johnpost.us
> :: elementary art website :: http://www.wemakeart.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Lee Love wrote:
>>
>>
>> I just heard that the top States in the ACT testing are:
>>
>> 1. Minnesota
>> 2. Iowa
>> 3. Wisconsin
>>
>> Bet they all pay more than $45,000 at 25 years.
John Post on wed 13 aug 08
Lee,
I am surprised to see you quoting ACT scores as any measure of the
quality of a school district or educational experience. But I do
agree that resources like good teachers with good salaries and ample
budgets are more likely to produce a quality educational experience
for kids than schools without these things.
Here's a min-rant about standardized testing which then evolves into a
few other topics...
ACT scores are just a way for colleges to easily sort out the
applications they get. Instead of actually learning about a candidate
for the school they just look at some kid's numbers and decide whether
or not he/she gets in. At least in the arts, schools often look at
student portfolios instead of numbers.
Why do students take the ACT? So they can get into college of course.
All of our education system is designed to teach kids how to pass
tests so they can get into college. It's like a giant freezer
method. Here, put all this information in your brain when you are in
6th grade so you can pull it out and use it when you get to college.
You won't actually have to demonstrate your understanding of what you
learned, you can just show us by filling in the correct bubbles on a
test sheet.
We are always teaching kids what they are going to need to know for
the next level, and the biggest next level of all is college. Why
don't we ever teach them about stuff that they are interested in based
on the age they are at right now?
This year my son learned about Boyle's law of gasses in science. The
teacher taught this by having the kids read about it from their
science text, I am sure they were all riveted. A good teacher could
bring this scientific law to life using props and doing experiments
(12 year old boys know alot about gas), but when I asked my son's
teacher about it, he said he didn't have time to do many experiments
because he had to get through all of the curriculum. WTF?
That's like saying I don't have time to really teach the kids because
I am too busy getting through the curriculum.
Of course this is all predicated on the assumption that he will need
to know this to get into college so let's make sure we just jam it in
his little freezer.
The best treatise I ever read on education was written by an auto-
mechanic. It's from Tom Magliozzi of the famous Click and Clack
Tappet Brothers of NPR. You can read it here...
http://www.cartalk.com/content/rant/r-rlast15.html
As far as curriculum guides go, after reading it, I usually throw mine
out. The schools I have worked for hired me because I am an artist
and teacher. If an artist can't teach kids how to make art, who can?
Most of the curriculum guides I have read are based on the principle
"a mile wide and an inch deep". Let's just expose the little guys to
a little of everything in the hopes that some of it sticks. My dad (a
truck driver) had this to say about that theory "if you throw enough
shit at the wall some of it is bound to stick".
In my district some teachers feel that since the curriculum guide has
weaving in it, that they must do a weaving project. So they do these
paper strip weaving projects instead of actually weaving a basket or a
rug or anything with real fibers. The kids usually throw them out
before they even hit the hallway. So in theory the kids have met the
curriculum and done a weaving project, but how much did they value it?
If you make something in clay with a kid, the kids are always asking
when they are going to get it back. I had a grandmother of a
kindergarten student come in one time and show me the pinch pot she
made when she was an elementary student. I asked her if she had any
of her other school work from her elementary school days and it turned
out the only thing she kept from 7 years at the elementary level was
the tiny pot. It's amazing the effect that one little lump of clay
can have on someone.
The way I teach wouldn't work for every teacher, it really just suits
me and my style, but here are some of my guiding principles...
~If I am not super pumped up about the lesson I am teaching, the kids
won't be either. I have got to want to learn about it and do it as
much as they do.
~Only work with authentic art materials. Drawing media, watercolor,
tempera, clay and glazes. No milk cartons, no glitter, no wiggly
eyes, no holiday art -ever. The kids need to work out 2-D and 3-D
problems just like real artists do. I once heard one kid say to a new
kid "In art class, first Mr. Post teaches us how to make a painting
about something and then he teaches us how to make a sculpture about
it." I never spelled it out like that for this kid, he just observed
how things work relating to the way I delivered the curriculum.
~ALWAYS tell the kids the goal of each lesson. If they are learning
about contrast, variety, cool colors or composition, tell them how
they can show what they learned in their art work.
~Leave room in each lesson for the kids to embellish and add their own
personality. As long as the kid has met the main goal of the
assignment he/she is free to make other parts of it their own.
I am not advocating that anyone else needs to take my approach to
teaching or that because I do it this way that the way they are doing
it isn't valid for them. Teaching is ultimately about people and
relationships. I am an artist because I met a painter named Tom
Parrish when I was in the last of the three different art programs I
tried. If not for him, I probably would have given up on the arts. I
loved his lectures about things that art students should do to become
artists. It wasn't the painting curriculum that made me want to be a
painter, it was the passion for painting that Tom Parrish delivered in
his presentations and critiques.
Can you tell I have a sinus infection and am spending more time on the
computer than in the studio because of the achy-all-over feeling?
John Post
Sterling Heights, Michigan
:: cone 6 glaze website :: http://www.johnpost.us
:: elementary art website :: http://www.wemakeart.org
On Aug 13, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Lee Love wrote:
>
>
> I just heard that the top States in the ACT testing are:
>
> 1. Minnesota
> 2. Iowa
> 3. Wisconsin
>
> Bet they all pay more than $45,000 at 25 years.
Kim Hohlmayer on thu 14 aug 08
Hi John,
Yes, the bigger budgets and salaries would be great but I will tell you the biggest issue the teachers I worked with ever talked about. They all said that class size was the real problem. Mind you, we all would have been glad of pay raises. Still, I actually heard teachers say that that they would pass on the pay raise if they could have much smaller classes. 30 kids in a class, sometimes more, does not leave enough time to get each kid the help he or she needs.
Yes, the really good teachers do a great job even with a huge class, but do the math. If I have 32 7th graders in a 40 minute class, then I have just over a minute to devote to each child for individual help and that is only if I don't present some sort of lesson that day. Now, let's multiply that vy 6 classes a day plus home room. During a very short home room period I have to take attendance, collect fees, and the year I actually taught 7th grade math I had to hand out flouride pills each day and have the kids do a liquid flouride swish and spit for some dental study
all in just a few minutes.
Then at night I had about 160 papers to grade (not everyone did their homework or it would have been more). If I graded them properly this would take all evening. Quite often there were government papers to fill out too about class size, ethnic make up, etc. And after school is when teachers have to call the parents of students who misbehaved or were behind in their school work.
And in 1988/89 I was doing all this for UNDER $20,000 per year gross pay. Is it any wonder that I turned them down when they wanted to renew my contract for that position? And I did not even do a particularly good job. Of course I needed to be in the arts which I eventually was and I also needed to grow up a bit. But the point is, money wasn't really the issue. The issue was that I didn't feel like I had enough time to handle it all and do right by my students. They needed so much more than I had time to give them.
As I said, there are teachers who did and still do accomplish so much more than I ever could. Yet there were others who stayed in teaching who coped okay but couldn't give their students what was really necessary for any real success.
Okay, enough preaching. --Kim H.
--- On Wed, 8/13/08, John Post wrote:
> From: John Post
> Subject: Re: Counsel needed ~wandering away from Kelly's topic into public education/ACT scores etc.
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2008, 10:34 PM
> Lee,
>
> I am surprised to see you quoting ACT scores as any measure
> of the
> quality of a school district or educational experience.
> But I do
> agree that resources like good teachers with good salaries
> and ample
> budgets are more likely to produce a quality educational
> experience
> for kids than schools without these things.
>
> Here's a min-rant about standardized testing which then
> evolves into a
> few other topics...
>
> ACT scores are just a way for colleges to easily sort out
> the
> applications they get. Instead of actually learning about
> a candidate
> for the school they just look at some kid's numbers and
> decide whether
> or not he/she gets in. At least in the arts, schools often
> look at
> student portfolios instead of numbers.
>
> Why do students take the ACT? So they can get into college
> of course.
>
> All of our education system is designed to teach kids how
> to pass
> tests so they can get into college. It's like a giant
> freezer
> method. Here, put all this information in your brain when
> you are in
> 6th grade so you can pull it out and use it when you get to
> college.
> You won't actually have to demonstrate your
> understanding of what you
> learned, you can just show us by filling in the correct
> bubbles on a
> test sheet.
>
> We are always teaching kids what they are going to need to
> know for
> the next level, and the biggest next level of all is
> college. Why
> don't we ever teach them about stuff that they are
> interested in based
> on the age they are at right now?
>
> This year my son learned about Boyle's law of gasses in
> science. The
> teacher taught this by having the kids read about it from
> their
> science text, I am sure they were all riveted. A good
> teacher could
> bring this scientific law to life using props and doing
> experiments
> (12 year old boys know alot about gas), but when I asked my
> son's
> teacher about it, he said he didn't have time to do
> many experiments
> because he had to get through all of the curriculum. WTF?
>
> That's like saying I don't have time to really
> teach the kids because
> I am too busy getting through the curriculum.
>
> Of course this is all predicated on the assumption that he
> will need
> to know this to get into college so let's make sure we
> just jam it in
> his little freezer.
>
> The best treatise I ever read on education was written by
> an auto-
> mechanic. It's from Tom Magliozzi of the famous Click
> and Clack
> Tappet Brothers of NPR. You can read it here...
>
> http://www.cartalk.com/content/rant/r-rlast15.html
>
> As far as curriculum guides go, after reading it, I usually
> throw mine
> out. The schools I have worked for hired me because I am
> an artist
> and teacher. If an artist can't teach kids how to make
> art, who can?
> Most of the curriculum guides I have read are based on the
> principle
> "a mile wide and an inch deep". Let's just
> expose the little guys to
> a little of everything in the hopes that some of it sticks.
> My dad (a
> truck driver) had this to say about that theory "if
> you throw enough
> shit at the wall some of it is bound to stick".
>
> In my district some teachers feel that since the curriculum
> guide has
> weaving in it, that they must do a weaving project. So
> they do these
> paper strip weaving projects instead of actually weaving a
> basket or a
> rug or anything with real fibers. The kids usually throw
> them out
> before they even hit the hallway. So in theory the kids
> have met the
> curriculum and done a weaving project, but how much did
> they value it?
>
> If you make something in clay with a kid, the kids are
> always asking
> when they are going to get it back. I had a grandmother of
> a
> kindergarten student come in one time and show me the pinch
> pot she
> made when she was an elementary student. I asked her if
> she had any
> of her other school work from her elementary school days
> and it turned
> out the only thing she kept from 7 years at the elementary
> level was
> the tiny pot. It's amazing the effect that one little
> lump of clay
> can have on someone.
>
> The way I teach wouldn't work for every teacher, it
> really just suits
> me and my style, but here are some of my guiding
> principles...
>
> ~If I am not super pumped up about the lesson I am
> teaching, the kids
> won't be either. I have got to want to learn about it
> and do it as
> much as they do.
>
> ~Only work with authentic art materials. Drawing media,
> watercolor,
> tempera, clay and glazes. No milk cartons, no glitter, no
> wiggly
> eyes, no holiday art -ever. The kids need to work out 2-D
> and 3-D
> problems just like real artists do. I once heard one kid
> say to a new
> kid "In art class, first Mr. Post teaches us how to
> make a painting
> about something and then he teaches us how to make a
> sculpture about
> it." I never spelled it out like that for this kid,
> he just observed
> how things work relating to the way I delivered the
> curriculum.
>
> ~ALWAYS tell the kids the goal of each lesson. If they are
> learning
> about contrast, variety, cool colors or composition, tell
> them how
> they can show what they learned in their art work.
>
> ~Leave room in each lesson for the kids to embellish and
> add their own
> personality. As long as the kid has met the main goal of
> the
> assignment he/she is free to make other parts of it their
> own.
>
> I am not advocating that anyone else needs to take my
> approach to
> teaching or that because I do it this way that the way they
> are doing
> it isn't valid for them. Teaching is ultimately about
> people and
> relationships. I am an artist because I met a painter
> named Tom
> Parrish when I was in the last of the three different art
> programs I
> tried. If not for him, I probably would have given up on
> the arts. I
> loved his lectures about things that art students should do
> to become
> artists. It wasn't the painting curriculum that made
> me want to be a
> painter, it was the passion for painting that Tom Parrish
> delivered in
> his presentations and critiques.
>
> Can you tell I have a sinus infection and am spending more
> time on the
> computer than in the studio because of the achy-all-over
> feeling?
>
>
> John Post
> Sterling Heights, Michigan
>
> :: cone 6 glaze website :: http://www.johnpost.us
> :: elementary art website :: http://www.wemakeart.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2008, at 7:46 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> >
> >
> > I just heard that the top States in the ACT testing
> are:
> >
> > 1. Minnesota
> > 2. Iowa
> > 3. Wisconsin
> >
> > Bet they all pay more than $45,000 at 25 years.
| |
|
