Boredom and C's

[Annie]

Interesting study here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070228...c&printer=1;_ylt=AmO2CNdZnywFjJbLFdLk4aAXIr0F

High school students bored, risk dropping out: survey

Wed Feb 28, 8:17 AM ET

High school students in the United States say they are bored in class and many have considered dropping out, according to a new survey.

In the report conducted by Indiana University, 75 percent of the 81,000 students who participated said they were bored in class because the material wasn't interesting and 31 percent said they had no interaction with their teacher.

"I think what is happening is students are not being involved in interactive ways in the teaching and learning," Ethan Yazzie-Mintz, project director of the university's Center for Evaluation Policy, said in an interview.

Instead of providing lectures, Yazzie-Mintz said teachers should consider other methods of teaching such as discussion and debate and group projects.

Yazzie-Mintz said teaching style, rather than class size, is largely responsible for this problem.

...

The reason I say interesting is the last of the 3 highlighted 'suggestions' has been being pushed by education departments for the past 15-20 years, yet over and over again, it has not proved an effective learning tool. Projects are those wonderful 'assessments' such as building a pyramid, making some sort of diorama, making and wearing costumes-while pretending to be a news host or guest. While there has been some positive learning results up to grade 4, the gains must be weighed against the reported negatives of usually being part of 'cooperative grouping': fighting with peers; being dominated by one or two members; being stuck with more than a fair share of work; being the 'smart one' in a group; being the 'low one' in a group; etc.

By the very nature of projects, the learning results from them tends to be on the lower end of cognitive development. They are literal interpretations of facts gathered.

In fact, the most effective method of dispensing information and for the learner to be able to interpret, synthesize, and generalize from is 'direct instruction', i.e., lecture. When combined with extension readings and assignments that require the learner to extrapolate and expand from the infomation given the results of testing demonstrate the integration of the information into the learner's base of knowledge.

While education departments in universities around the country keep pushing for 'cooperative learning', project based assessments, etc., the math, science, and even social sciences departments are racking up the proof of the less effective methodologies.

I would hypothesize that the results from the 'study' may be skewed by the researchers or possibly the students are a result of having had 'group fun' in lower grades, have not adjusted to the more rigorous and effective teaching in secondary schools.

 

[gabosaurus]

This is because, in many states, teachers are under immense pressure to have their students pass standardized tests. The teachers end up spending more time going over the limited spectrum of the tests and much less teaching students what they need to know.

 

[Kagom]

I have to say I was bored with a lot of classes. Only a handful I actually knew more than the teacher.

I say high school doesn't offer enough academic level (my school had general level, academic level, and honors level for classes) classes that are challenging or interesting.

 

[Annie]

This is because, in many states, teachers are under immense pressure to have their students pass standardized tests. The teachers end up spending more time going over the limited spectrum of the tests and much less teaching students what they need to know.

But nowhere was that the results the researcher was responding to. In actuality, I don't think you find that much teaching to tests, unless the teacher is a poor teacher. Of course, these would be among the bright lights that get caught changing student answers and such.

 

[Annie]

I have to say I was bored with a lot of classes. Only a handful I actually knew more than the teacher.

I say high school doesn't offer enough academic level (my school had general level, academic level, and honors level for classes) classes that are challenging or interesting.

You mean less than a full complement of college prep?

 

[gabosaurus]

But nowhere was that the results the researcher was responding to. In actuality, I don't think you find that much teaching to tests, unless the teacher is a poor teacher. Of course, these would be among the bright lights that get caught changing student answers and such.

I have read that, in Texas and a couple of other states, teachers can be fired if enough of their students do not pass the state mandated standarized tests. Meaning you can be a great teacher, but if your students blow off the tests, you can lose your job.
I had some great teachers in high school. Then again, I was a good student. Others were not as interested.

 

[Annie]

I have read that, in Texas and a couple of other states, teachers can be fired if enough of their students do not pass the state mandated standarized tests. Meaning you can be a great teacher, but if your students blow off the tests, you can lose your job.
I had some great teachers in high school. Then again, I was a good student. Others were not as interested.

Most students would not purposely fail standardized test to 'get' a good teacher.

 

[Kagom]

You mean less than a full complement of college prep?

I believe so. The academic classes weren't that challenging, nothing like a college level course would be. English was a joke. In my religion classes I knew more and even had to help the teacher often to make sure she was correct. Math (aside from Geometry) was easy. Science, I will say, was difficult, but that is only due to the fact that my skills in science is below average. Languages I won't really comemnt on. That's something that just seems to come to me. My other electives were interesting, though, but the only real problem was the limited amount you could have.

 

[Annie]

I believe so. The academic classes weren't that challenging, nothing like a college level course would be. English was a joke. In my religion classes I knew more and even had to help the teacher often to make sure she was correct. Math (aside from Geometry) was easy. Science, I will say, was difficult, but that is only due to the fact that my skills in science is below average. Languages I won't really comemnt on. That's something that just seems to come to me. My other electives were interesting, though, but the only real problem was the limited amount you could have.

What sort of area were you living in? City, suburb, rural? I think it's a crime that so many non-magnet Chicago schools do not have a full AP menu, when so many of the parents would need to struggle financially to enroll their children for the classes in college.

In most of the suburban schools around here, all or nearly all of the possible AP classes are available. It's not difficult for a bright, motivated kid to test out of a year or more of gen ed college courses, either graduating early or leaving time within 4 years to more deeply study their areas of concentration.

I know that rural areas struggle both to find teachers and enough students to field the classes.

 

[Kagom]

What sort of area were you living in? City, suburb, rural? I think it's a crime that so many non-magnet Chicago schools do not have a full AP menu, when so many of the parents would need to struggle financially to enroll their children for the classes in college.

In most of the suburban schools around here, all or nearly all of the possible AP classes are available. It's not difficult for a bright, motivated kid to test out of a year or more of gen ed college courses, either graduating early or leaving time within 4 years to more deeply study their areas of concentration.

I know that rural areas struggle both to find teachers and enough students to field the classes.

Town/suburb.

 

[JeffWartman]

Most students would not purposely fail standardized test to 'get' a good teacher.

From what I can tell, that's not necessarily what he meant.

He just meant if your students decide to blow off a standardized test you can be fired regardless of anything.

 

[Annie]

From what I can tell, that's not necessarily what he meant.

He just meant if your students decide to blow off a standardized test you can be fired regardless of anything.

That would only happen if a school district arbitrarily put in some sort of 'class' expected results that differed negatively. Teacher positions are not threatened when the class performs as expected based on previous test scores of the students and school performance expectations.

Now when addressing something like tying salary increases to performance v. tenure, it gets much trickier, but there are truly few examples to look at.