tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post3990880637993012710..comments2024-03-02T15:23:18.091-05:00Comments on D-Ed Reckoning: Pot. Kettle. Bracey.KDeRosahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-37337539758331363672009-12-02T17:33:55.779-05:002009-12-02T17:33:55.779-05:00I don't understand why it is so difficult for ...I don't understand why it is so difficult for politicians to one, realize that they have no business in deciding what's best for public education, those who are involved and see it every day are the experts in this category and that they are unbelievably hypocritical. Bracey himself states that the wealthier neighborhood schools do better than the poor, so why is it then that funding is being taken away from these poor schools and given to the wealthier schools? To increase the high and low SES gap. There is a direct correlation between poor neighborhoods and achievement, the money isn't going to their schools the same as wealthier neighborhoods and the students then don't have the supplies, space or teachers that they need. If a school is short on funds a teacher is going to have more students in their classroom to decrease the number of teachers needed to save money. A teacher with 30 students cannot teach as effectively as a teacher with 15 students, it's easy to see. I have another question that I would like to ask politicians and that's how is that they're so smart to "know" what students need if the education system in this country has been so bad? How did they get so smart? What kind of education did they receive? What kind of education are their children receiving?jendreamernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-17884733538237008842009-11-19T14:22:26.361-05:002009-11-19T14:22:26.361-05:00Tracy, that "answer" would earn you a fa...Tracy, that "answer" would earn you a failing grade in any pschometrics course, but this isn't a psychometrics course. Your misunderstandings are so twisted and convoluted that I can't untangle them here. <br /><br />No problem. We're commenting on a blog and got sidetracked on a matter that has no bearing on the thread.<br /><br />Ken has gone on to other matters. Me too.Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-53801643414129968182009-11-19T13:50:52.733-05:002009-11-19T13:50:52.733-05:00Right. Either way you get a measurement and I don...Right. Either way you get a measurement and I don't see why going through the more complicated IRT route yields invalid results.<br /><br />maybe I should read through the papers again, but last time I did I didn't see this question being adequately dealt with.<br /><br />I think the problem with measuring reading ability (i.e., comprehension in the later grades) hinges on knowing background kniowledge which correlates with IQ/SES because it it often not explcitly taught in school and therefore must be largely learned via the out-of-school envirnonment.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-1100239513312641572009-11-19T13:40:15.546-05:002009-11-19T13:40:15.546-05:00Ken - actually I think I can say what a latent tra...Ken - actually I think I can say what a latent trait has to do with IRT.<br /><br />A latent trait is more difficult to measure than something direct like height or weight, or something homogenous and univariate like visual acuity. So all the statistical complexity of IRT is useful in measuring latent traits. You could use it on measuring height, or visual acuity, but why bother when simpler methods work just fine for the simpler measurement problems?Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-79786786550758284792009-11-19T13:26:46.847-05:002009-11-19T13:26:46.847-05:00Ken: I think I understand the IRT issues, but I do...Ken: <i>I think I understand the IRT issues, but I don't see why a school that does a very good job teaching can't decrease the gap in an IRT test. </i><br /><br />Neither can I. This is why I keep questioning Dick whenever he claims this. <br /><br />Incidentally, I had better say explicitly that I assume that we are talking about a test designed using IRT that properly measures whatever the school is doing a very good job teaching. If the test in question was aimed at measuring musical composition which the school didn't teach I'd still expect a gap obviously.<br /><br /><i>I also don't understand what a latent trait has to do with any of this.</i><br /><br />Again, I don't either, this is one of the reasons why I say that Dick has a bee in his bonnet about IRT.Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-80129102021743026712009-11-19T13:24:36.249-05:002009-11-19T13:24:36.249-05:00As for your referred papers:
In "All Achievem...As for your referred papers:<br />In "All Achievement Tests are not Created Equal", you say:<br /><i>Tests referenced to the general curriculum both showed a high level of performance "at level" on matters they had been taught and a lower level of performance on matters "above level" that they hadn't yet been taught.</i><br /><br />In other words you found as an empirical matter that standardised achievement tests responded to instruction. <br /><br />As for "Program-Fair Evaluation of Instructional Programs", this is an old paper where you and Ralph Hanson appear to have developed a methodology for measuring what programmes are trying to achieve. It looks fine to me, but I can see nothing in there that explains how come Gering School District can be doing so well on tests if those tests are not sensitive to instructional differences. Admittedly it is a long paper and the scan's hard on my eyes, I could easily have missed something. If you could specify the relevant page in the pdf that would be great.<br /><br /><i>However, Gering has nudged the distribution of test scores upward. </i><br /><br />Interesting claim. Where did you locate the distributional data for Gering High school? I couldn't see it in the links in Ken's post.<br /><br />So to summarise, of the responses you make:<br /> - One of your supplied references directly contradicts your claim that tests are not sensitive to instructional differences. <br /> - I cannot find any support for your claim in your other reference. <br /> - You make a claim about the distribution of Gering High School data but do not link to where you found this data.<br /> - You criticise IRT proponents for assuming that latent traits like reading ability and driving ability are homogenous and univariate while recommending a measuring system for them that can only measure traits that are homogenous and univariate. <br /><br /><i>It hasn't changed the shape of the distribution which would be necessary if the instructional accomplishments were attained--no child left behind.</i><br /><br />Actually, if Gering High School provided as good an education for its top students as it did for its bottom then the shape would still be the same. In other words, let's say a school sucessfully teaches every child to read well enough to read and comprehend the local newspaper. While it is teaching the necessary skills to the slowest learner, it also advances the instruction of all the other learners, bringing say the top performing group up to reading Chaucer in the original, the next level up to reading Shakespeare, and so forth. So my hypothetical school would have achieved its instructional goals, and still have a broad distribution of results.Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-45894695849839370532009-11-19T13:24:07.878-05:002009-11-19T13:24:07.878-05:00I'm going to answer your question, Tracy, so y...<i>I'm going to answer your question, Tracy, so you were wrong about that prediction.</i><br /><br />This makes it then one of those times that I am happy to be proved wrong (there are plenty of times when I am proved wrong). Thank you for taking the time to answer my question. I am afraid though that I am not convinced by your answer. <br /><br /><i>IRT proponents slide right from latent a latent trait which must be homogeneous and univariate into skill ability. </i><br /><br />Nothing in the maths requires a latent trait to be homogenous or univariate. <br /><br /><i>. Reading and driving are not amenable to equal interval measurement but they are amenable to measurement with Gutttman scales analogous to measuring spoons or the Snellen eye chart that is used in vision tests.</i><br /><br />Measuring spoons are based on known relationships of volume, for example a standard tablespoon is 3 standard teaspoons. It is not obvious to me what it means for person A to have 3 times as much reading ability as person B. <br /><br />The Snellen eye chart is a set of standardised lines of letters of different sizes, so if a subject can at a distance of 20 feet (in the USA) read the 4th line accurately but not the 5th line the optician can work out the difference in resolution at that height. Again, it is not obvious to me what the equivalent is in terms of reading ability. <br /><br />Driving ability and reading ability are complex, someone may have learnt to drive on an automatic, never driven a manual and thus be incapable of doing a hill start but has driven safely in all sorts of traffic and weather conditions, are they a better or worse driver than someone who recently learnt to drive on a manual and can do a hill start without thinking about it? <br /><br />Another thing I notice about your analogy is that measuring spoons and eye charts only measure traits that are homogenous and univariate. Snellen eye charts only measure visual acuity, they do not measure other aspects of vision such as colour-blindness. Measuring spoons only measure volume, not weight or temperature. If reading ability and driving are amenable to meausrement with Guttman scales then reading ability and driving ability must be homogenous and univariate, the very thing you wrongly sneer at IRT proponents for claiming.<br /><br />So we have a contradiction here. Dick simultaneously falsly criticises IRT proponents for assuming that things like reading ability are homogenous and univariate, while also saying that reading ability can be measured by analogy with methods which can only cope with homogenous and univariate features.Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-87678563786073241502009-11-19T11:14:17.563-05:002009-11-19T11:14:17.563-05:00Yes, there is a portion of the far right that curv...Yes, there is a portion of the far right that curves around meets back up with the far left, though both are at each other's throats.<br /><br />Having said that though, I do not believe that the progressives, misguided though they are on almost every single issue, want to destroy public education (i.e., government run schools). Like everyone else, progressives want to a) be in power and b) improve the education of children. The progressive's favored way of accomplishing things is with a heavy governmental hand. But that isn't working in education and the base is growing dissatisified with the educational status quo and the players. Advocating charters is a good way to maintain control of schools while appearing to upset the status quo.<br /><br />Repulicans, like Gingrich, believe that the government running things like schools is a bad idea. A properly regulated and competitive free market will yield better results. They still believe in government subsidies and/or funding. That doesn't strike me as a desire to destroy public education. It's just another belief for how to improve education outcomes which is consistent with their political view.<br /><br />In this case the politics is making strange bedfellows but neither side wants to abolish public funding for education.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-18828021330598960432009-11-19T10:34:21.196-05:002009-11-19T10:34:21.196-05:00Gingrich is hardly far right, Dick.
Point taken. ...<b>Gingrich is hardly far right, Dick.</b><br />Point taken. That used to hold, but the right wingnuts have moved farther to the right.<br /><br /><b>Do you mean that both the<br />progressive and far right want to destroy public education. I think neither is the case.</b><br /><br />It's no secret that the Republican Party agenda is to privatize public education. Rove/Dubbya wanted to effect this with school vouchers in NCLB, but that didn't happen. <br /><br />Newt Gingrich says that the only part of the Obama administration agenda he takes issue with is that he would prefer vouchers (spun as Pell Grants)instead of Charter Schools.<br /><br />RttT promotes Charter Schools and adds three other killer reforms to the agenda.<br /><br />Secretary Duncan and the Progressives see none of the technical flaws in NCLB that will brand every public school district as "failing." The aim is to rebrand the title of the legislation.<br /><br />My reading is that this amounts to wanting to destroy public education, akin to I'm going to kill (reform) you to save you from yourself.<br /><br />This is so contrary to the promises President Obama made in the campaign and to the values of the base of the Democratic party that the American public doesn't yet know what is going on.<br /><br />Reform, high quality, world class, standards, removing unqualified teachers. Who could be against such? But each term is either empty or aimed directly at the core of public schooling.<br /><br />The "race" is going to me the mother of all education muddles.Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-13589348106651767532009-11-18T20:53:25.485-05:002009-11-18T20:53:25.485-05:00Gingrich is hardly far right, Dick.
The "pro...Gingrich is hardly far right, Dick.<br /><br /><i>The "progressive" agenda for elhi education is exactly the same as the educational agenda of the far-right agenda . When you see Newt Gingrich playing a starring role on the "Road Tour" along with Secretary Duncan, with Reverend Al there for "diversity," you know where the Feds are heading.<br /></i><br /><br />Do you mean that both th eprogressive and far right want to destroy public education. I think neither is the case.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-10055436752716771432009-11-18T20:37:56.468-05:002009-11-18T20:37:56.468-05:00Ken says Inadvertently, the feds are hastening the...Ken says <b>Inadvertently, the feds are hastening the demise of public education as we know it with such measures.</b><br /><br />It really isn't inadvertent. The "progressive" agenda for elhi education is exactly the same as the educational agenda of the far-right agenda . When you see Newt Gingrich playing a starring role on the "Road Tour" along with Secretary Duncan, with Reverend Al there for "diversity," you know where the Feds are heading.<br /><br />We've got a real "education crisis" going. The National Academy of Sciences has warned that each of the four reforms has no foundation. If you look at the 500 point rating sheet at the end of the RttT, it's clear that the "reformers" don't even know how to construct a decent rating form. <br /><br />In giving their assurance that they will implement the "reforms" states have little wiggle room to be "innovative."<br /><br />The public schools are a well-established institution and 80+% of parents are satisfied with the school they are sending their kids to.<br /><br />Charter schools have barely made any inroads into public schools.<br /><br />The only question is how and when the "Race to the Top" will implode.<br /><br />Jerry Bracey would have speeded up the implosion. But it will happen without him.Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-146234487824018032009-11-18T18:55:33.973-05:002009-11-18T18:55:33.973-05:00I'm going to answer your question, Tracy, so y...I'm going to answer your question, Tracy, so you were wrong about that prediction. But you are likely right in predicting that you'll say the answer is not "meaningful."<br /><br />Incidentally, it's Frank Baker, not Charles Baker. Frank is not a leading authority on IRT. He explains it in what I regard "in a meaningful way. But he's descibing the IRT pitch. IRT proponents slide right from latent a latent trait which must be homogeneous and univariate into skill <b>ability</b>. Reading expertise is clearly neither a homogeneous or univariate thingy. It changes it's manifest nature as the individual moves from novice to expert. <br /><br />Height and weight are manifest variables amenable to measurement with equal interval scales as temperature can be measured. Reading and driving are not amenable to equal interval measurement but they are amenable to measurement with Gutttman scales analogous to measuring spoons or the Snellen eye chart that is used in vision tests.<br /><br /><b>If tests were sensitive to SES differences but not to instructional differences, then how come the Gering School District is doing so well?</b><br /><br />The extended explanation is in a couple of SSRN papers:<br /><i>All Achievement Tests are Not Created Equal</i><br /><br /><i>Program-Fair Evaluation of Instructional Programs</i><br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">http://ssrn.com/author=1199505</a><br /><br />But I can give you the short answer. The Gering data show that Gering is doing relatively better in teaching reading per the test norms. I've repeatedly said that a legitimate instructional architecture can over-ride SES differences and DI is one such architecture. <br /><br />However, Gering has nudged the distribution of test scores upward. It hasn't changed the shape of the distribution which would be necessary if the instructional accomplishments were attained--no child left behind.<br /><br />Nor has Gering eliminated the "racial gap"--nor likely the "gender gap." These gaps are largely a function of the instructionally insensitive tests rather than of the instruction.Dick Schutzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09815175767173164494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-22332756128225953742009-11-18T18:29:31.260-05:002009-11-18T18:29:31.260-05:00The conclusion I draw is that when middle-class pa...The conclusion I draw is that when middle-class parents start finding out that they can't buy their way into good school districts with better teachers since all the better teachers will have to be shipped to the low SES schools, support for public education and the enormous tax burden it causes will fall. In advertantly, the feds are hastening the demise of public education as we know it with such measures. That's probably a good thing.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-11067338510862474152009-11-18T18:21:36.337-05:002009-11-18T18:21:36.337-05:00It may be a foolish definition of Effective but it...It may be a foolish definition of Effective but it can still cause great mischief. The comment to RttT (page 418) makes it clear that involuntary reassignments will soon be the norm. <br /><br />It's fascinating that the feds rejected expressly requiring or even awarding points for states who implemented the NMAP's recs on math teacher prep programs and licensing requirements.(Page 130/775)<br /><br />What conclusion should be drawn about "reform" that has a weak definition of "effective" teachers AND kept rejecting all attempts to strengthen instructional materials and the knowledge and skills of the teaching corps based on research as to what works?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11914876123232834323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-54532455347375567982009-11-18T18:18:24.918-05:002009-11-18T18:18:24.918-05:00Before I start on IRT, do you have any questions f...<i>Before I start on IRT, do you have any questions for me about what latent traits are?</i><br /><br />Yes, that's exactly where the entire argument falls apart for me.<br /><br />I think I understand the IRT issues, but I don't see why a school that does a very good job teaching can't decrease the gap in an IRT test. If the students learned more, then the there should be a better chance that they know more and have a better chance of answering a random question correctly.<br /><br />I see why this might break down if a large sample of students were to answer the random question correctly, leading to the question being thrown out.<br /><br />However, I don't see why one school or one district can't increase their mean performance under an IRt test.<br /><br />I also don't undersatnd what a latent trait has to do with any of this.<br /><br />though I agree with Dick that tests should be more sensitive to instruction.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-34756613638940066912009-11-18T17:48:09.892-05:002009-11-18T17:48:09.892-05:00Ken: And i still can't make heads or tails of ...Ken: <i>And i still can't make heads or tails of the IRT/latent trait issue.</i><br /><br />Okay, here's my take on the latent trait issue. <br />We are interested in things like how well a person is able to read, or drive a car, or do basic arithmetic.<br />However we can't directly observe reading ability, or driving ability, or arithmetic ability like we can observe height or weight. All we can observe is the person doing, or trying to do but failing, various tasks. <br /><br />In order to distinguish things that you can't directly observe, like reading ability or driving ability, from things you can directly observe, like height, weight, hair colour, Charles Baker, in the source on IRT Dick provided, calls the first category latent traits. <br /><br />Before I start on IRT, do you have any questions for me about what latent traits are?Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-19071708076826378672009-11-18T17:33:40.499-05:002009-11-18T17:33:40.499-05:00I didn't intend to take us off topic and there...<i>I didn't intend to take us off topic and there is no reason to get further off, just to humor silly misinterpretations and faulty inferences.</i><br /><br />And this is Dick all over. He's happy to make confident sounding pronouncements, but if you challenge him on them, he will either claim that he's right or will do his best to change the topic one way or another. Dick never backs up what he says. <br /><br /><i>A: The consequences are <br />(1) a belief that SES is causal. This belief is strengthened by achievement tests that are sensitive to SES differences but not to instructional differences.</i><br /><br />Dick, do you read Ken's blog? In this very post on this thread, Dick says that the amount of variation in performance attributable to variations in SES is only about 18%. See http://d-edreckoning.blogspot.com/2008/03/statistical-illiteracy.html<br /><br />And <a href="http://d-edreckoning.blogspot.com/2009/07/more-evidence-that-good-instruction-can.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> Ken reports on Gering School District, which has moved to DI, and is now seeing higher performance on average than Nebraska despite the SES levels being below the state average.<br /><br />If tests were sensitive to SES differences but not to instructional differences, then how come the Gering School District is doing so well?<br /><br />I am going to now make a prediction. Dick is not going to answer my question in any meaningful way. He is not going to produce any evidence to support his claim that standardised achievement tests are insensitive to intrustional differences. Instead he is going to try insulting me, saying very firmly that he's right and changing the topic.Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-21251893276140277012009-11-18T16:56:09.989-05:002009-11-18T16:56:09.989-05:00Ken says I'm not convinced that highly effecti...Ken says <b>I'm not convinced that highly effective teachers in affluent suburban school districts will remain highly effective when transported to low-SES districts.</b><br /><br />RttT regs define effective teachers and principals as those whose students make at least a year's gain on standardized tests.<br /><br />That's a foolish definition, and it provides further incentives for teachers and principals to game the mandate.Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-89407866468038665862009-11-18T16:03:57.506-05:002009-11-18T16:03:57.506-05:00Ken asked for my view of the issues Jerry treated ...Ken asked for my view of the issues Jerry treated in his last report.<br /><br />I go along with Jay Mathews:<br /><br /><b>Jerry leaves the first two assumptions, about high-quality schools and mayoral control, looking like road kill.</b><br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2009/11/braceys_last_report--our_sick.html</a><br /><br />I think Jerry also did a good job of trashing "standards."<br /><br /><br />Ken says, <b>The difference is that my personal bias has a research foundation</b><br /><br />True. Jerry did have a few Points of View which occasionally got in the way.<br /><br />Another Bracey posthumous publication re testing is spot on and it may help clarify what has tangled up at least one re IRT.<br /><br />I can't get the link to activate, so anyone interested will have to google for it. <br /><br />The Big Tests: What Ends Do They Serve? <br /><br />Published in the Nov. issue of Educational Leadership. What Jerry says about NAEP applies in spades to lesser standardized achievement tests.<br /><br /><b>There seems to be an out of school deficiency that schools haven't learned how to fully compensate for yet.</b><br /><br />True. But kids, parents and citizenry aren't looking to schools to redistribute income. Just to teach them enough to be employable and/or go on to college.<br /><br /><b>And i still can't make heads or tails of the IRT/latent trait issue</b><br /><br />It really isn't an issue. If you believe that academic achievement is a latent trait, you go along with the standardized testing industry (and Tracy W) and you're content with instructionally insensitive tests. If you don't believe in "latent traits," a notion that psychologists (other than misguided psychometrists) long-ago discarded, you look for alternatives. Alternatives are there for the implementing, but they are not currently being considered.Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-34192746975966181792009-11-18T15:23:45.810-05:002009-11-18T15:23:45.810-05:00Q:what are the long term consequences of emphasizi...Q:<b>what are the long term consequences of emphasizing the gap instead a growth in achievement for everyone</b><br /><br />A: The consequences are <br />(1) a belief that SES is causal. This belief is strengthened by achievement tests that are sensitive to SES differences but not to instructional differences.<br /><br />(2) a belief on the part of many that schools cannot override the adverse conditions of poverty. That is, we have to "fix" poverty before schools can "fix" kids.<br /><br />Meanwhile, every school district and public school in the country is headed to being termed "failing" by 2014 and the National Academy of Sciences has warned that each of the four RttT "reforms" has no scientific/technical foundation.<br /><a rel="nofollow">http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12780&page=1</a>Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-91225167453142526592009-11-18T15:15:16.738-05:002009-11-18T15:15:16.738-05:00RttT is more of the same from DoE. It won't ...RttT is more of the same from DoE. It won't work and has no indicia of success to rely upon. This is the bane of every ed reform of the past and RttT is no different in this respect.<br /><br />I'm not convinced that highly effective teacher sin affluent suburban school districts will remain highly effective when transported to low-SES districts.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-65026896168340925542009-11-18T14:04:50.165-05:002009-11-18T14:04:50.165-05:00According to last week's final RttT regs the E...According to last week's final RttT regs the Ed Dept "believes that the inquitable distibution of highly effective teachers and principals is a major cause of the achievement gap". (Page 412/775)<br /><br />The regs makes it clear states and local districts will have to come up with plans to reassign such teachers and principals to high minority and high poverty schools so there is no longer a disproportionate presence in low minority and low poverty schools.<br /><br />That makes sense except there was no attempt to do anything to increase the total number of effective teachers, require content mastery (except for alternative candidates), or require effective curricula.<br /><br />Good instructional materials and a knowledgeable teacher allowed to instruct can take the high SES kids who travel, grew up with books, and talk politics and economics at the dinner table to an achievement level that's hard for low SES kids to ever get to.<br /><br />Is our nation's emphasis on closing the achievement gap encouraging policies that hamstring our strongest students so other students can catch up?<br /><br />If poor instruction and the resulting lack of practice to fluency in language, reading, and math can affect the physical structure of the brain, what are the long term consequences of emphasizing the gap instead a growth in achievement for everyone?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11914876123232834323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-79193288657011603312009-11-18T13:00:48.533-05:002009-11-18T13:00:48.533-05:00All of my comments stand as stated.
The thread is...All of my comments stand as stated.<br /><br />The thread is about "Pot. Kettle. Bracey" I didn't intend to take us off topic and there is no reason to get further off, just to humor silly misinterpretations and faulty inferences.<br /><br />Anyone want to talk about Bracey or the final Bracey Report?Dick Schutzhttp://ssrn.com/author=1199505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-23869522684787285842009-11-18T12:50:04.448-05:002009-11-18T12:50:04.448-05:00My bad on misconstruing the purpose of Bracey'...My bad on misconstruing the purpose of Bracey's first argument. Though the specific deficiencies I point out still hold.<br /><br />Dick says "His take on this is pretty much yours. My take differs from both you and Jerry."<br /><br />What is your view, Dick?<br /><br />Dick also says "For example, I know a guy who fiercely and regularly promotes DI. Nothing wrong with that."<br /><br />The difference is that my personal bias has a research foundation, Bracey's does not. Most pundits tout lots of stuff with no research base, but Bracey was being hypocritical because he a. knows how to evaluate research and b. ignored the lack thereof anyway.<br /><br />Dick also says in response to Parry "Precisely. And schooling is in the middle. Since aggregate children enter school with the minimum prerequisites to acquire academic expertise, the disparity at the back end has to be a function of the schooling."<br /><br />Yes and no. There seems to be an out of school deficiency that schools haven't learned how to fully compensate for yet.<br /><br />And i still can't make heads or tails of the IRT/latent trait issue.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-46911515433098788562009-11-18T12:23:21.427-05:002009-11-18T12:23:21.427-05:00Robin - I would be surprised if any sort of learni...Robin - I would be surprised if any sort of learning did not affect the physical neural structure of the brain. Of course it is entirely possible for me to be surprised, I do not pretend to be an expert on brains. But if anyone theorises about learning being stored elsewhere I become deeply curious about where else they think it might be stored. <br /><br />Dick, I will answer your questions once you have answered mine from earlier. Please provide the evidence that convinced you that:<br />1. That reading expertise resides in some other organ than the brain, in support of your assertion that "Reading expertise doesn't exist in the brain; there are no "latent traits" in the brain." <br />2. That reading expertise is an directly observable feature of people in the same way that height and weight is.<br />3. That most people have bought into the IRT derivatives. (We will leave the claim that most people have done this "without understanding its workings" until later).<br />4. That items which most students get wrong and items which most students get right are discarded because they poorly discriminate the "latent trait" that IRT posits. <br />5. That Item Response Theory discards the grain and keeps the chaff.<br /><br />Or, if you can't provide the evidence, tell me that you now agree that those statements of yours were wrong and you were wrong to say them, and that you were wrong to say that "The factual basis of my earlier statements is verifiable."Tracy Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999246551652981965noreply@blogger.com