Why Are You in Algebra 2?

The title is a thought I have had a number of times lately. I do some tutoring online, and the largest number of my sessions come from students who are seeking an Algebra 2 tutor. [I also tutor Algebra 1, Geometry, Trigonometry, and Statistics.] Sadly, many students' sessions begin with something like this:

Student: I need to solve this equation [student shares an equation containing a logarithm].
Me: Have you ever done an equation like this one before?
Student: No.
Me: OK...have you ever worked with logarithms before?
Student: What's a logarithm?

Although it's not the focus of my concern while I'm tutoring, there are several possible explanations for such ignorance:

• The student is goofing around, either presently, or in class earlier in the day(s).
  
• The student is taking an online course and has no teacher to whom to ask questions; consequently, the student is totally lost.
• The student has been passed from one math course to the next over time, has learned virtually nothing, and is now hopelessly puzzled.
• The student is actually at the college level and probably hasn't taken a math class in years, if not decades.

The last two options seem to be depressingly common. I am led to the following thesis:

Students should not be permitted to take Algebra 2 until they have demonstrated a firm level of competency in Algebra 1. This applies both in high school and at the college level (regardless of what these courses may be named in college).

This became a big issue in Michigan a couple years ago (see my thoughts here) when the legislature, in a perhaps-well-meaning-but-totally-void-of-reality move made Algebra 2 part of the general graduation requirements for all public school students. Among other problems, this pressures teachers in the earlier grades to pass students along so that they can "get to Algebra 2 and pass it" before completing high school. This is neither wise nor fair.

But that's not my main point here. Parents and teachers in the upper high school grades (and professors, academic advisers, and students in colleges) must recognize that if the student is not ready for Algebra 2, the student should not be taking Algebra 2. The student should instead be sent to Algebra 1 (or, if necessary, something more basic) in order to master the requisite skills needed.

Self-esteem is not an issue here, either. It is no more psychologically beneficial to struggle with, cheat through, or fail one course than it is to step back and take a remedial one that will, in the long run, help the student to succeed.

Furthermore, a competent teacher with a class full of competent Algebra 2 students will be able to make more progress than if that teacher has to try to get all the incompetent students caught up at the same time. In other words, those students who have succeeded up to this point won't be held back by all the students who (for whatever reason) have not.

Finally, let us note that the blame for this phenomenon can be shared all around. Sure, some kids are slackers and are lost in Algebra 2 for reasons of their own creation. Yes, some teachers are inept [they should be removed, but discussing teacher unions and their prerogatives is not the point of this post]. Certainly, some parents pay no attention to their children's educational progress. And, contemptibly, some school administrators don't really care.

If you are a parent of an Algebra 2 student (or one yourself, at whatever age or level), consider this: Make sure your student is ready to take that class. If not, get them ready...first.

Warnings for Homeschoolers: Arrogance

This is the fifth in a series of posts about homeschooling. If you haven't read the first four, you may want to do that first, but here are a few theses about what I'm going to write both now, and in any posts to come:

• Children must receive an education based on the Word of God.
  
• Parents must be involved in their children's education.
• I believe that if a person decides that, after wisely considering the options, praying, and researching, that they ought to homeschool their children, I am OK with that, and I wish them well. These posts are written in the spirit of graciously warning them about some perils in the path.
• The key question: What is, in the will of God, the best option for providing quality Christian education to my children?

I want to distinguish here between "wholesome pride" and arrogance, so there is no confusion about what I am describing.

"Wholesome pride" is the emotion which takes a justifiable pleasure in something done well. It is not primarily selfish, nor does it gloat. It is the emotion a parent may feel when his child wins a contest, makes a big play in a ball game, or does something kind and selfless for another person. One can have a wholesome pride in his country (and for those of us who live in America, we should), in the military, in his favorite ball team, in his alma mater, or in his own accomplishments. "Wholesome" connotes that it is not sinful.

"Arrogance," on the other hand, is primarily selfish. It comes with the attitude of "Look what I [or my child, or my husband, etc.] have done, and envy—or be humbled. I [or the other person] can do this better than you." It is quite similar to the pride spoken of in Scripture, in passages such as Proverbs 8:13, 16:18; Daniel 5:20; and Obadiah 3. "Arrogance" is always sinful.

Most homeschoolers I have met fit into one of the two categories. Those in the first category may say (or silently communicate) such thoughts as these, in a humble tone:

• I am so glad to be able to homeschool my children.
• My child is now able to ____.
• Homeschooling has allowed our family to ____.

Furthermore, as they communicate with others about homeschooling, they will exhibit gratitude for the opportunities, blessings, and results which accompany it. If Christian, they will thank God for what happens.

The other group, however, tends to exhibit their arrogance in ways that betray what they are doing. Here are a few common illustrations:

• "My child can ____." [Comment delivered in a prideful/overbearing tone] Sure, overbearing parents exist in every form of education. But when it's the teacher/parent who is prideful about what his child can do, the impression is compounded.
• "No one can teach my children better than I can." Maybe so. But there are two big assumptions underlying the statement: You know your child and his educational strengths and weaknesses better than anyone, and you have the pedagogical skill to help him learn better than any other teacher could. The first, to be honest, is likely. The second is not. And on top of it all, your pride will make you a weaker teacher. Humility tends to help us see our own weaknesses more successfully—so that we can improve them.
• "We do a better job teaching our child than ____ School would." Or, "Our child gets better achievement test scores than the kids at ____ School." Again, that may be true. If "the local public school" goes in the blank, well, you should be disappointed if you aren't. Be careful about comparing your child to the "average" student of any school, though; all schools have their higher achievers as well as their lower ones. Comparisons should be cautious at best.

Most importantly, though, arrogance has a disconcerting way of seeping down to the next generation. If your children see you being arrogant, whether about your skills as the parent/teacher or about their achievements, the seeds of pride will be sown in their own hearts. If your child grows up to be prideful, then were you really the best teacher he could have had?

Warnings for Homeschoolers: Socialization

This is the fourth in a series of posts about homeschooling. If you haven't read the first three, you may want to do that first, but here are a few theses about what I'm going to write both now, and in the posts to come:

• Children must receive an education based on the Word of God.
  
• Parents must be involved in their children's education.
• I believe that if a person decides that, after wisely considering the options, praying, and researching, that they ought to homeschool their children, I am OK with that, and I wish them well. These posts are written in the spirit of graciously warning them about some perils in the path.
• The key question: What is, in the will of God, the best option for providing quality Christian education to my children?

This is by far the most overblown warning offered by those who don't homeschool. The problem is that there are just enough examples out there to provide the anecdotal evidence some people want to see.

The simple fact is that young people in all sorts of educational settings—public, private, homeschool—range from the unnaturally shy to the abnormally gregarious. Most likely, they would demonstrate the same personalities regardless of the schools they attend.

And of course, for every example of a strange homeschool kid who doesn't know how to act around his peers, there will be another example of one who not only socializes well, but also interacts maturely with adults, with children—with people of any age.

This warning is a simple one: If you homeschool, take care to do two things.

1. Give your children opportunities to constructively interact with others their own age, as well as others both younger and older than themselves. These opportunities could come at church, in Little League, with the neighbors, or in community organizations. It is true that kids should learn how to interact with others, and it is important that they get practice doing so. A well-rounded child should be able to interact with normal people younger, older, or similar in age to himself.
2. Teach your children social interaction skills. Manners aren't dead; courtesy never goes out of style. Model proper interaction when your children are present. Critique what you view together on TV (where you will certainly see plenty of examples of how not to behave in social settings). Share suggestions at meals on proper table etiquette. Remind children that they need to consider the feelings and emotions of others.

Really, these things apply to all of us who have children, whether we homeschool or not: If we give our children these opportunities and teach them how to interact socially, they will likely do quite well.

Warnings for Homeschoolers: Curriculum

This is the third in a series of posts about homeschooling. If you haven't read the first two, you may want to do that first, but here are a few theses about what I'm going to write both now, and in the posts to come:

• Children must receive an education based on the Word of God.
  
• Parents must be involved in their children's education.
• I believe that if a person decides that, after wisely considering the options, praying, and researching, that they ought to homeschool their children, I am OK with that, and I wish them well. These posts are written in the spirit of graciously warning them about some perils in the path.
• The key question: What is, in the will of God, the best option for providing quality Christian education to my children?

Once the decision is made to homeschool, one of the biggest decisions—and one of the hardest—is deciding what curriculum materials to use. The reason it's hard is because most parents are not curriculum experts. Here are some common options (but certainly not the only ones):

• Curriculum materials from Christian publishers, such as BJU Press, A Beka, and others
• Curriculum materials from secular publishers
• Online/video courses from a variety of sources

Some parents may choose to use one publisher exclusively for all (or most) subjects; others may choose to be more eclectic. Then, of course, deciding how the curriculum is going to be unveiled to the student:

• Will the parent "teach" in a traditional sense, lesson-by-lesson?
• Will the parent supervise as the student learns, for the most part, on his own?
• Will the parent be completely hands-off and rely upon videos, online classes, etc.?

The materials used to educate your children are very important. [Disclaimer: I work for one of the largest Christian textbook publishers in the country.] Let me begin by listing some reasons parents should not use for choosing any particular curriculum over another:

• This is what my friend recommends. That's nice, but is your friend an expert on how to educate, or more to the point, how to educate your children? A surprising number of decisions seem to be made based on nothing more than an informal suggestion.
• This is what the salesperson told me would work best. Keep in mind: They are salespeople. They are compensated based on their ability to convince you of this. Again: Does the salesperson know what's best for your children?
• This curriculum is cheaper. That might be true of the milk with tomorrow's "Sell By" date, too, but that isn't necessarily a good reason to buy it. Sometimes you get what you pay for.

Here are some things I think every Christian homeschooler must consider before making curriculum decisions:

1. Research extensively. What works for your best friend's kids may not work for yours...and that's OK. You need to go to trade shows, visit conferences, get on the internet, physically look at the books, and-yes-talk to the salespeople, etc., in order to get a good feel for what is out there. And the less you know about pedagogy, the more research you need to do. Ask for the opinions of those who have wisdom and knowledge in the field. If you do not know anyone like that, hunt them down. Plan to spend serious numbers of hours on this; it could be one of the biggest homeschooling mistakes you make...or one of the best decisions.
2. Use Christian materials to the greatest extent possible. There is a place within the curriculum for age-and-maturity-appropriate exposure to classical literature, current political events, and so forth. For the most part, however, quality Christian curricular materials are available for every major subject, and should form the core of your homeschooling curriculum. If you really expect to give your children a Bible-based education, you should use Bible-based materials in each subject.
3. Know your limitations as the teacher. Not a chemistry expert? Can't remember a thing about geometry? Then take this into account when choosing curriculum. There is a saying that says something like, "The parent just has to stay a chapter ahead of the child." Baloney. Then the child will remain one chapter behind you. If you cannot teach it with confidence, consider how you could get your child to learn the material more successfully.
   
4. Try to avoid "hands-off" options. This is the balance to the previous point. Some parents leave their children in a room with a screen to "watch school." This is not ideal. The parent, no matter what his or her knowledge level in a given subject, needs to stay involved and aware with each lesson, so as to best help the child when it's needed. Even if the parent isn't a chemistry expert, he or she should still be keeping abreast of the coursework the child is completing.
5. You may have to stay cognizant of state requirements, but it's often OK to think outside the box. This is particularly important if you have several children being schooled at the same time. Can two or more children be working on the same coursework? Is one able to help (note: I did not say "teach") others who are younger? Don't go overboard, though: Reading, math, science, and history—and, of course, the Bible—are all still critical elements of a proper education; don't leave them out.

Remember that the key is to help your children receive the best possible, quality Christian education that you are able to provide. It will take research, time, and effort. It won't always be fun. Choosing the best curriculum for your children will go a long way to that end.

Warnings for Homeschoolers: Making the Decision

Why homeschool? My wife and I got this question back in 2008 when we began homeschooling our two eldest children. It is not a decision one arrives at lightly.

Let me list what I believe are not key reasons to choose to homeschool. They may be "contributing factors" to such a decision, but should not be the "key reason:"

• Money: Either the cost of homeschooling materials, or the cost of alternatives, such as Christian school, is often used as a reason to homeschool or not to homeschool.
  
• Personalities: I don't like so-and-so at that school/I don't think so-and-so is that good of a teacher.
• Convenience: Homeschooling can be convenient: The schedule is flexible, you won't need a lot of gasoline, and snow days aren't really an issue.

Here is what I believe is the key question around which the decision to homeschool centers:

• What is, in the will of God, the best option for providing quality Christian education to my children?

"Quality," in line with a post I wrote several weeks ago, implies that the education is both thoroughly Christian (i.e., from a Christian, Bible-based worldview) and academically challenging.

Some people have no other quality Christian education option in their geographic area, so the decision to homeschool may not be difficult. Others will have one or more Christian schools from which to choose. This is where the "best" part comes in. It may be that a local Christian school will be able to provide a more thorough, educationally robust Christian education than the parent can. And that's OK.

Most importantly, the will of God must be discerned through prayer and counsel.

My parents provided an excellent example of this. They had Christian school options. They realized that neither of them really knew much about teaching or education (in an academic sense), so they never gave homeschooling much thought. They knew that, in the will of God, the best thing, for their three children to get a quality Christian education, was to send them to a local Christian school. They sacrificed to get the money, they didn't let personalities interfere, and convenience wasn't allowed to be an issue. For this, I and my brothers must be ever grateful.

Two years ago, when it came to our turn to make this decision, we went a different route: We concluded, in the will of God, that the best decision for our two eldest children, for them to get a quality Christian education, was to homeschool them. For our two youngest, we continued to keep them in a local Christian school, for the same reasons.

And now that we have moved to a new state, the decision has changed again: All four children are in an excellent Christian school, where they will get a quality Christian education. We believe that, in the will of God, this is the best choice.

Who knows? Maybe this will change again some day, but we will always be looking for the will of God to be done, so that our children can get the best quality Christian education we can provide.

Warnings for Homeschoolers: Introduction

I know a lot of people who homeschool; we homeschooled two of our children from 2008-10. I know that many people do a great job educating their children in this way; there are also quite a few who do not. And I also know that I am passionate about children getting the best possible education their parents can provide.

When it comes to homeschooling, there are two principles that I think are inviolable:

• Homeschooling is not for everyone. Or in other words, there are some parents who would be wise not to homeschool their children.
• Not everyone who decides to homeschool knows how to do it well.

The decision to homeschool is never one to be taken lightly. It is a decision which should be preceded by large amounts of both prayer and research. And whether parents decide to homeschool or not, they must remain involved in their children's education.

I intend to write a group of posts related to warnings for homeschoolers. They are mainly aimed at those who enter into the homeschool venture with less than a full understanding of what they are getting (or, have gotten) themselves into. I think that homeschoolers tend to make the most major mistakes in three key areas:

• Curriculum: What should be covered? What textbooks/materials will I use to teach my children...or will I use videos or online education?
• Socializing: Yes, the media has overblown this...badly. But it seems that a lot of homeschoolers err on both sides of this issue.
• Arrogance: Some homeschoolers will tell you that there is no one that can train their children better than they can...or if they don't say it (because they have some degree of tact), their attitudes give it away. Maybe they're right—but pride can be a dangerous element in the homeschool environment. Many spurn the well-intentioned and wise advice of others. This is not good.

Please be assured that if a person decides that, after wisely considering the options, praying, and researching, that they ought to homeschool their children, I am OK with that, and I wish them well. These will be written in the spirit of graciously warning them about some perils in the path.

The Media Just Doesn't Get Homeschooling

In an AP story I found on foxnews.com, someone evidently discovered that a lot of the most popular science textbooks among homeschooling parents do not promote Darwinian evolution. Early in the article we find this:

Christian-based materials dominate a growing home-school education market that encompasses more than 1.5 million students in the U.S. And for most home-school parents, a Bible-based version of the Earth's creation is exactly what they want. Federal statistics from 2007 show 83 percent of home-schooling parents want to give their children "religious or moral instruction."

No surprise there—that's why they homeschool! The public indoctrination centers (a.k.a., public schools) promote and propagandize the theory of evolution while trying their very best to demean and squash any thought that an all-powerful and all-knowing God created everything.

The majority of the rest of the article then whines about the fact that some homeschoolers—presumably that other 17%—don't want their children taught about Creation. Why such people would choose to use Christian science materials is beyond me, unless it is because such books do such a good job of teaching science overall.

One of the two books featured in the article is the Biology (3rd ed.) text from Bob Jones University Press, my alma mater. I am somewhat familiar with the first two editions of the Biology book, and I am even now using their 3rd edition 7th grade Life Science textbook with my daughter. This is an absolutely top-notch textbook in every way. If the Biology text is even half as good as the 7th grade text—and I strongly suspect it is—it will still be one of the very best Biology textbooks around.

The "reviewers" used by the AP in this article demean these texts; one said he would give the books an F. They clearly equate "good science" with slavish devotion to evolutionary theory. This is one of the greatest errors of our age. The mass of evidence points to a Creator far more powerful than we comprehend, not to an existence that came about by some happenstance or chance.

And if parents want to teach this to their children, more power to them.

Singing the Praises of the President

By now most of us have heard about the video of the elementary kids singing the praises of President Obama. I find it repugnant, and, like so many other things, I am severely disappointed that the media isn't pouncing on school administrators for this. You know, like they would have if two years ago children were singing the praises of the last president.

Now we learn more about the principal of the school. Dr. Denise King (someone please tell me who granted her a doctoral degree) is an Obama fan, and attended Obama's inauguration last January. Consider the following:

• Pictures she took at the inauguration made it into the school yearbook...despite the fact this was not a school field trip.
• Pictures of the president adorned the halls and various classrooms of the school. I have no problem with hanging a picture or two of the president on the wall (students, after all, should know who the president is and be able to identify him), but it sounds like this school went a bit overboard.
• Photos of "Obama-themed activities" were in the yearbook. I wonder what exactly those were....?

However, there were two facts about the principal that I found particularly troubling:

• According to parents who spoke with Dr. Denise King, "The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could" [Emphasis mine].
  
• According to public records, Dr. Denise King hasn't voted since 2004! The article states, "A search of public records revealed that King, 46, of Cinnaminson, N.J., last voted in 2004 and had not declared any political affiliation. No records of political contributions could be found."

On the upside, the article made me feel better that my children are not in public schools.

A Great Posting About Parents and Schools

Over at the blog Michigan Blogger I read this great post this evening about how "Parents Need To Step It Up To Help Schools." Here are a couple of its excerpts:

I encourage you to read the entire post; it's a great one!

More days and longer hours seem like a good idea but it won't help until we fix the biggest problem with the schools.

The biggest problem with schools is parents. Yes, parents. Ask any educator and he or she will tell you - for the most part - that the best students have parents interested in their childrens' education.

There are too many parents letting their kids get away with too much by not disciplining them. Why should a kid behave in school when there is not only no punishment for bad behavior but the kid gets a sense of encouragement when the parent defends the improper actions.

That's not to say there aren't other problems with the school because there are. I will get into those issues another time. For now, we need parents to get behind the teachers and put the proverbial foot in the proverbial behind of their kids to make sure they get an education.

GRPS Foolishness May Be Spreading...

Back in December the Grand Rapids Public School District (MI) announced that F's were not going to be issued on students' report cards, replaced instead by an amorphous "H" (presumably for "held," as in the grade is held pending completion of...something; or for "hope," according to a school district spokesman). This was expected to improve the dropout rate. I blogged about it at that time.

But now, according to foxnews.com, we learn that this foolishness extends from coast to coast! Linked also to this article is another which identifies six more school districts, although an unspecified number of additional districts apparently do something like this. The new code acronym is "ZAP," for "Zeroes aren't permitted."

These additional six school districts do not use the "H" grade (I hesitate to call it a grade, but that is what it is functioning as), but instead lasso the offending did-not-do-homework students into either an after-school activity (we called this "detention" in my day) to complete the assignments or some other situation which demands that the homework be completed. In general, once the students complete the assignment, even if it's late, they can generally get a grade higher than a zero on it.

If a school district wants to codify its procedures for students who don't do assignments to mandate their attendance in an after-school activity [a.k.a., punishment for not doing homework is detention], I have no problem with that. I would like to note two things, however:

• It appears that no one wants to use the word "punishment" or any synonym that contains a negative connotation. Students are helped and taught, not hurt, when they learn that failure to meet their responsibilities requires a consequence—and "punishment" is one such accurate term for it.
• There needs to be a "point of no return" beyond which, if the assignment isn't completed, a zero is the result. I can even be charitable and give a "day of grace" (or even two, for a first offense) before issuing a zero, but that window of opportunity should not stay open for long. For one thing, the logistics for the teachers are going to be a burden as it is.

And, oh, by the way, how is this working up there in Grand Rapids? From mlive.com we get some more details, but the second foxnews.com article summarizes them nicely:

"But according to figures released earlier this week, the effort may not be working. Just 16 percent of classes failed during the program's initial trimester were converted into passing grades, and in 68 percent of classes students made no attempt to reconcile the grade. Another 15 percent of the classes were failed a second time." [Emphasis mine]

The liberal softie may claim that it's worth doing it for those 16% to get a passing grade, but that's not the point—those students would be permitted to retake the class anyway, despite the "H" grade initially received! I'm happy for those 16%; I am disgusted for the 68%. Evidently for them there was not sufficient motivation to try to redeem their grade!

Let's be honest, for by so doing, the students will learn the lesson: Failure matters. If you have not put forth adequate effort and obtained minimally expected results, you will reap the consequence. It's true in the workplace and true on the field of sport; it is one of the most basic lessons every citizen of this country (and every illegal alien, for that matter) should learn.

A Terrible Idea From Grand Rapids Public Schools

Yesterday, Grand Rapids Public Schools announced that there will be no F's on report cards this trimester: If a student did not pass a class, he will be awarded an "H." It's called the "Success Only Option," and of the 20,930 classes taken by students throughout four high schools, 2,364 of them will be assigned a grade of "H" when report cards come out this week.

None of the four high schools in the district is meeting the federal standards. Lots of their students drop out (about 25%)...typically the ones who get the F's. The idea here, presumably, is that the students will realize that they still have the opportunity to take the class again, or take it online or in some other format (such as summer sessions), so that they can still have the opportunity to pass. The administrator of the district was quoted as saying something along the lines of "Failure is something that all of us experience..., but why do we want to visit that [failure] on 14-, 15-, and 16-year-old children?"

Students will have one term to retake the class, and then the grade could change to an F. An "H" was referred to as a "delayed failing grade."

Teachers, naturally, are not pleased. They realize that these same immature "14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds" also frequently fail to have the maturity to meet deadlines, deal with stress, and reach expectations. Giving them a perceived "out" will make the teacher's job even more difficult (and in a district like GRPS, it's difficult enough—and that doesn't even count their labor union issues) when one of those same immature kids tells them, "Who cares? I'm not going to fail your class! You can't fail me! So what if I have to take it again later?"

Parents should not be pleased, either. As a teacher, I firmly believe that the largest part of high school failing grades and dropouts have their roots in parents who, over time, have not put an emphasis on education and who have not taught their children by their lives, actions, and words that education and graduation are of high importance. Parents who do those things generally have kids who pass and graduate, so why should they be worried? Because their children's teachers are going to have a more difficult task dealing with the immaturity of the other students, thereby shriveling up the time they can give to teaching!

Those who have not been involved in public education (as adults, not students) often are oblivious to how much disruption the more immature students are capable of inflicting. To empower and embolden them by saying "Don't worry, you won't get an F" is going to be like waving red in front of bulls. Classroom decorum will suffer.

But most of all, this terrible idea isn't going to accomplish its goal of getting more students to graduate. To graduate, you still have to pass the required courses. An "H" isn't a passing grade; it is not adequate to get the credit. At best, it will stall the dropout from dropping out. Consider these two students:

1. Student A, after two years, has 7 credits and 3 F's.
2. Student B, after two years, has 7 credits and 3 H's.

Both are equally close to (or far away from) graduating. Both still have 3 credits to get. Both still have the same opportunities to get those 3 credits. The first student may feel despondent; the second may feel indifferent—yet neither of these is good!

The cold, hard truth is that children must recognize the consequences of life. They must learn, through lessons small or large, that failure to meet their responsibilities reaps failure in some area of life. Ideally, they will learn this before high school in things less substantial. The immature student might actually benefit from the kick-in-the-pants that an "F" brings, when he finally realizes that consequences are real, serious, and sometimes life-long. Isn't that a good thing?

The Michigan Merit Curriculum: A Math Teacher's View

About a year ago, the Michigan legislature passed and the governor signed into law a bill creating statewide graduation requirements (previously, each district set its own requirements; only civics was a statewide graduation mandate). Among other things, this "Michigan Merit Curriculum" (MMC) requires the incoming Class of 2011 to have seventeen required credits to graduate (plus electives), and of these, four are in math: Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, and a fourth class of the student's choice.

Like the equally well-intentioned yet equally unwise federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001), the legislation represents an attempt by legislators to dictate to local school districts what is best for those districts. Herein lies the first problem: Legislators know less about what schools and students need than the superintendents, school boards, principals, and especially the teachers in those schools. I have a hard enough time believing that my own state representative could keep track of what all the school districts in her own elected area need—much less what a big-city district like Detroit, or a far-off rural district in the U.P. needs. And I certainly know that members of the U.S. Congress can't keep track of individual district needs!

The corollary to the first problem is this: Not every district in the state should have the same graduation requirements. There is nothing wrong with this. Currently, not every district offers the same array of courses/electives. That's fine, too. If anything, people moving to an area would be encouraged to learn more about each district's course offerings and graduation requirements (and test scores) before buying a home and settling in to a school district. Some districts could justify a four-math-credit requirement; others most certainly cannot. Competition among districts and efforts to distinguish a district from its neighbors would likely thrive. These are good things.

But the Biggest Problems lie here: The inevitable outcome of the MMC policy will be a combination of the following things:

• The dropout rates will soar. Already, it has been reported that 20-30% of freshmen students failed Algebra I last year—statewide. These students, plus many more who came close to failing, are already discouraged from taking Algebra II (not to mention the other newly-required courses) and will be more likely to choose dropping out than frustration. Dropout rates that were released this week are already dismal enough.
  
• The course known as Algebra II will be watered down...a lot. In order for many to pass, teachers and administrators will feel the pressure to make the class easier so that more kids will pass. This pressure will come from nearly every corner...and it will be effective in most places. Note: The "curriculum standards" will not change, just their application in the classroom. The test scores, on the other hand, will change.
  
• Social promotion will return with a vengeance. Yes, students will be passed along by teachers who, quite frankly, don't want them (and perhaps their ill-mannered, complaining parents) in their classrooms next year. It's already going on in public schools without the newly added pressure. Some teachers will face administrators administering that pressure.
• The disgraceful irony of this will be that the teachers/education system will be blamed. Teachers and schools who hold the line on not watering down the math courses and who do not practice social promotion will take heat for no other reason than a larger number of failing students—when they ought to be commended for encouraging quality work. Admittedly, there are teachers who aren't doing the job as well as they should (but is this not true in every vocation?). Yet I think that ignorant legislators, ambivalent parents, and apathetic students will all be getting less of the blame that will inevitably come when this MMC is shown to be unsuccessful.

In sum, I think the MMC is a bad idea. As a math teacher, I want every student to take as many math courses as they can. I want students to enjoy them and be successful—this is my passion. But not every student is capable of being equally successful, and it may be that other coursework is more appropriate for some students or more conducive to their long-term success. The MMC does not allow much liberty in this regard.

This will eventually become another example of a well-intentioned, poorly-thought-out, dictated-from-the-capital government policy that has the unintended consequence of failure. Significant decisions like these belong in the hands of local school leadership.

Is Something Wrong With the Teachers?

Foxnews.com reported an article yesterday which says that many elementary teachers are poorly prepared to teach mathematics. It is not that they are unable to perform the mathematics germaine to their students' level (multiplication tables and fractions, for adults, should be pretty easy); the study they report on states that these teachers are "poorly prepared...to teach math." What does this mean?

The fact is, most elementary teachers do know how to do the math problems their students are learning to do. But not all of them can do the following:

• Explain the underlying concept—why, precisely, "does" 12 × 7 equal 84? There is a good reason for this.
• Prepare the student for what comes next—for example 3½ equals 7/2...but what is the purpose? How is this fact going to be used going forward?
• Show the relevance of the mathematics to everyday life—not only the cute story problems about numbers of apples and making change from a $20, but also problems not found in a textbook [it troubles me to think how few times teachers, and not only in math, don't even bother to try to come up with outside-the-book questions for students; this should be common].

Many elementary teachers do a great job in these areas. Some, quite frankly, do not—and some of them may not even know how! Ask your child's elementary teacher sometime how these things are used in the classroom.

A Definition I Like

I was reading an e-mail today on the subject of mentoring and came across this definition of "Surrendering the outcome to God":

To surrender the outcome to God means acting faithfully through the process, but relinquishing control of the results.

As long as I feel responsible for the outcome of the lives of others, I live in worry. I fret about not being able to manipulate the right outcome. I wonder why I can't force my children to respond to the truth. I sluff off responsibility to pass the baton, rationalizing that "They won't listen to me anyway."

But when I surrender the outcome to God, fear melts away. If I'm confident that God will bring about the outcome that pleases him, I'm free to stop wheedling and manipulating and cajoling. I'm free to let God open the floodgates of blessing if he chooses to do so.

The e-mail came from the Passing the Baton ministry, which can be reached here.

Substitute Teaching: Final Summary

The 2007-2008 school year has come to a close. Beginning April 28, I was substitute teaching daily at Heritage Christian Academy after Mrs. VanDyk had her baby. So here, at last, are the final totals (there are 87 substitute teaching days, if you don't want to add them yourself) of where I was and how often I was there:

• Mattawan (27; 14 in HS, 12 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Decatur (6; 1 in HS, 3 in MS, 2 in Elem.)
  
• Paw Paw (5; 4 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Gobles (5; 4 in HS, 1 in MS)
  
• Lawrence (5; 3 in HS, 1 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
• Bloomingdale (3; 2 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Lawton (3; 1 in Alternative Ed., 1in HS, 1 in MS)
• Howardsville Christian (2, HS)
• Heritage Christian (31 days teaching MS math and science, & Consumer math)
  

It has been a very interesting year....

News That Should Disturb You

In this London Times online article, we are told about a new breed of school parent in Japan: The "Monster Parents." The article begins with a story about a school play, Snow White, which featured no dwarfs, no wicked witch—but 25 Snow Whites playing the lead. And the parents apparently couldn't be happier.

Apparently a big shift has taken place in Japanese society: Where once, not so long ago, teachers were revered, they are now the targets of aggressive criticism—and more. Groups of angry parents have been known to (successfully) demand the dismissal of teachers. The Times describes it this way:

Where previously schools were trusted and respected, they are now the targets of concerted activism. Dozens of educators have been forced to resign in the face of the blazing fury of parents who no longer tolerate anything that appears to disadvantage their offspring.

The atrocious selfishness these parents display for their children (and really, themselves) is repugnant. But as a private school teacher here in the good old USA, I have seen it. Many parents believe that everything circles around their child—and in so doing, infest their children with a selfishness no less than their own.

And, yeah, it can make the teacher's life difficult, too.

Substitute Teaching: End of P.S. Update

Congratulations to the VanDyk's, whose baby girl was born today! And this means that I will be substitute teaching Jr. High math and science until the end of the school year at Heritage Christian Academy—with no more public school substituting this school year, so far as I can tell.

This means the following totals, through 4/28/08, are likely complete:

• Mattawan (27; 14 in HS, 12 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Decatur (6; 1 in HS, 3 in MS, 2 in Elem.)
  
• Paw Paw (5; 4 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Gobles (5; 4 in HS, 1 in MS)
  
• Lawrence (5; 3 in HS, 1 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
• Bloomingdale (3; 2 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Lawton (3; 1 in Alternative Ed., 1in HS, 1 in MS)
• Howardsville Christian (2, HS)
  

And of course, 1 day at HCA...so far.

I still have so many interesting stories to tell....

When Public Education Cannot Succeed

I had another sub assignment today in a local public high school. And I observed a lesson seen before, but brought clearly before my eyes again.

A lesson which, for the record, applies to all of education: Public, Christian, Sunday school, or otherwise.

The teacher whose geometry classroom I inhabited today left a bit too little for the students to do—I could see that right away. So I planned to spend the first 10-15 minutes review what [to me, especially] were familiar topics, in order to help them succeed on their worksheets. This went fine; but then several students absolutely refused to do the assigned work, preferring instead to talk, goof around, sleep, or generally distract all their neighbors. And then they complained that they didn't know how to do the geometry!

There are several problems here. But the fact which was made frightfully obvious today was this:

Learning cannot take place when the student is in rebellion to the teacher.

Public education is inherently handicapped in various ways, including its inability to effectively discipline and the general lack of support our society gives in holding up authority. The fact that students refuse to obey their teachers is the fruit reaped from seeds earlier sown.

These children did not appear to be stupid, unintellectual, or whatever politically correct (or incorrect) term you care to use. The reason they had not been learning was because they did not want to submit themselves to the authority and teaching of the teacher.

And is this not also true spiritually? Can we learn the lessons of God when we put ourselves outside His authority—when we are, quite bluntly, in rebellion against His leadership in our lives? Will we not then become "fools" (to invoke the Proverbs term) also??

Substitute Teaching: Spring Break Update

Now that we have reached spring break in this part of the world, it is time for me to update my substitute teaching totals.

So through 4/4/08, here is where I have been so far:

• Mattawan (26; 13 in HS, 12 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Decatur (6; 1 in HS, 3 in MS, 2 in Elem.)
  
• Paw Paw (5; 4 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Gobles (5; 4 in HS, 1 in MS)
  
• Lawrence (4; 2 in HS, 1 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
• Bloomingdale (3; 2 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Lawton (3; 1 in Alternative Ed., 1in HS, 1 in MS)
• Howardsville Christian (2, HS)
  

I still have so many interesting stories to tell....

Beginning in late-April, I will be "subbing full-time" at Heritage Christian through the end of the school year, which will end the need to keep track of the public school totals. H&R Block season ends abruptly on April 15.

Substitute Teaching: End of February Update

Since beginning with H&R Block in early January, I have only substituted three times—all at Mattawan. Two were in the MS, and one in the HS.

So through 2/29/08, here is where I have been so far:

• Mattawan (23; 12 in HS, 10 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Decatur (5; 1 in HS, 2 in MS, 2 in Elem.)
  
• Paw Paw (5; 4 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Gobles (5; 4 in HS, 1 in MS)
  
• Lawrence (4; 2 in HS, 1 in MS, 1 in Elem.)
• Bloomingdale (3; 2 in HS, 1 in Elem.)
  
• Lawton (2; 1 in Alternative Ed., 1 in MS)
• Howardsville Christian (2, HS)
  

I still have so many interesting stories to tell....