tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post7798449277293128455..comments2024-03-02T15:23:18.091-05:00Comments on D-Ed Reckoning: Your Pet Reform is Suckier Than You ThinkKDeRosahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-12050709664429617922008-04-11T10:43:00.000-04:002008-04-11T10:43:00.000-04:00Long live Anonymous. Unpretentious comment even i...Long live Anonymous. Unpretentious comment even if not meeting the standards of the precious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-7369490645328807432008-04-09T22:16:00.000-04:002008-04-09T22:16:00.000-04:00Thanks, Allison. What actually makes me sigh is th...Thanks, Allison. What <I>actually</I> makes me sigh is this:<BR/><BR/><I>Ed schools don't like things that work. They like ideology. It's easier. You don't have to be smart or work very hard to spout ideology. You have to be smart and work hard to actually DO something and understand why it works.</I><BR/><BR/>The par-for-the-course stupid that I now expect every time I flip open my damn browser.<BR/><BR/>Oh, wait, and, similarly, <A HREF="http://www.zigsite.com/" REL="nofollow">this</A> :<BR/><BR/><I>I hate the phony rigor associated with getting something published in a "refereed" journal. I see most of the articles (possibly 85%) as people trying to write about something they have never done or never even closely observed but quoting long lists of others who are as naive as they are.</I><BR/><BR/>Oh boo hoo. So what? Bring up DI in education circles today and just listen to the hissing. Isn't that an ad guy losing at his own game?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-79254229985586323922008-04-08T15:01:00.000-04:002008-04-08T15:01:00.000-04:00J.D. Fisher,Thanks for the link, even if it does m...J.D. Fisher,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the link, even if it does make one sigh.<BR/><BR/>The part I found so fascinating was it demonstrated that it isn't even lofty ideology or deep political/philosophical convictions that lead teachers and ed schools to deny DI. It's simply self-congratulations.<BR/><BR/>They want to feel good about themselves. It must be their character that affects the outcome! It must be that they are GOOD PEOPLE! Anything that restricts them from feeling good about themselves in their performance art is bad.<BR/><BR/>Of course, people who need that level of feeling good about themselves do tend to find certain philosophical and political beliefs more in line with their own personal emptiness, but that's a result, not a cause, it appears.<BR/>The True Believer comes to mind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-85489977497080403572008-04-08T12:37:00.000-04:002008-04-08T12:37:00.000-04:00Vanilla Ice: Schools need to stop, collaborate, an...Vanilla Ice: Schools need to stop, collaborate, and listen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-65513694683211817782008-04-08T11:11:00.000-04:002008-04-08T11:11:00.000-04:00He's not half the man MC Hammer is.He's not half the man MC Hammer is.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-29996080237392353402008-04-08T10:48:00.000-04:002008-04-08T10:48:00.000-04:00Are you implying that Vanilla Ice sucks? Sir, I ma...Are you implying that Vanilla Ice sucks? Sir, I may have to ask you to step outside. Nobody rocks harder than the ice man.Brett Pawlowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12975091738110736912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-76357441526436146552008-04-08T01:54:00.000-04:002008-04-08T01:54:00.000-04:00There is one other effect which I think is on the ...There is one other effect which I think is on the order of DI...Home Schooling. <BR/><BR/>I have not seen any formal studies, but I bet Zig's "TEACH YOUR CHILD TO READ IN 100 EASY LESSONS" has have far greater penetration into the Home school market than DI has had in a class room setting public or private. I just wish they had more books in that series for math and writing and reading past the second grade.Robert Sperryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00947778813690974327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-12755620158103806592008-04-08T01:00:00.000-04:002008-04-08T01:00:00.000-04:00I think you're making the goals of NCLB more compl...I think you're making the goals of NCLB more complicated than it needs to be. One looks at all the statistical wizardry (which I don't dispute) and one can become very sour on the goals of NCLB. Instead, I think it makes more sense to throw out the bell curves and the standard deviations, and instead think about getting all students to a basic level of proficiency. Less (complicated) is more.<BR/><BR/>First we have to define proficient. It has to lie somewhere between ridiculously easy and completely out of reach for all students.<BR/><BR/>Certainly if the goal of NCLB was to get "all students" to know their timetables by the end of 10th grade, I don't think we'd be standing around talking how "impossible" that goal was. Similarly, I don't think making the reading goal of third grade decoding, or being able to differentiate between animal, plant and mineral for science would likewise be deemed out of reach for tenth graders.<BR/><BR/>Scores themselves will always follow a curve if there is enough of a sample. But good old Pass/Fail is what we should really be thinking of in terms of achievement for all children.<BR/><BR/>Certainly, we can't and shouldn't aim for every high school graduate being college ready. But neither should we settle for less than all children exiting high school with a functional level of reading and math.<BR/><BR/>Except for maybe the less than 1% of children with disabilities (which is a far smaller number than 1% of all children), this goal doesn't seem out of reach with proper instruction, such as DI.<BR/><BR/>DI has taught kids with IQs of 30 (the very low IQ range) how to read/decode. If it is possible with the lowest of the low, certainly it is more more than doable with kids within the low IQ range (60-84) and above.<BR/><BR/>Anything less should be considered a crime.Spedvethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03059941547661456333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-90871215187771184412008-04-07T21:57:00.000-04:002008-04-07T21:57:00.000-04:00*Sigh.*Never mind.<A HREF="http://www.textsavvyblog.net/2006/10/ethos-and-pathos.html" REL="nofollow">*Sigh.*</A><BR/>Never mind.J.D.Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15086717026860206281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-25393959299917812422008-04-07T20:48:00.000-04:002008-04-07T20:48:00.000-04:00Kderosa said, "It doesn't take a genius to look at...Kderosa said, "It doesn't take a genius to look at the DI curricula, see why it is successful, and then try to replicate it. Or maybe they have looked at it, figured out what made it successful, and then decided that it was against their ideology to do things that way."<BR/><BR/>That is exactly right. Ed schools don't like things that work. They like ideology. It's easier. You don't have to be smart or work very hard to spout ideology. You have to be smart and work hard to actually DO something and understand why it works.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-31298698119005421932008-04-07T19:32:00.000-04:002008-04-07T19:32:00.000-04:00That's a good question, JD.It doesn't take a geniu...That's a good question, JD.<BR/><BR/>It doesn't take a genius to look at the DI curricula, see why it is successful, and then try to replicate it. Or maybe they have looked at it, figured out wht maade it successful, and then decided that it was against their ideology to do things that way.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-50180961583000775472008-04-07T19:04:00.000-04:002008-04-07T19:04:00.000-04:00Nice post.I've always been disappointed with the p...Nice post.<BR/><BR/>I've always been disappointed with the paucity of ideas in the public realm as to how DI could be generalized. There are axioms and everything. Yet what most people hear about DI is that it's a whole package--Mr. Consumer or Mr. Researcher can't understand how it works, and he or she never will.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-19276445331182875872008-04-07T14:14:00.000-04:002008-04-07T14:14:00.000-04:00This is more of a visual aid for readers which is ...This is more of a visual aid for readers which is trying to explain difficult statistical concepts related to the effects of educational reforms. I used the classroom/students as the most readily understandable unit and used the studies as examples to demostrate the underlying concepts even though the studies aren't at the classroom/individual level.<BR/><BR/>I've defined a proficiency level and have shown what happens in an average classroom with various interventions of specific effect size. <BR/><BR/>Not sure what you mean by "individual-level effect sizes." these effect sizes are presumed to be for the distribution given in standard units.KDeRosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-90592176491067372592008-04-07T13:22:00.000-04:002008-04-07T13:22:00.000-04:00Ken, I am very confused. None of the studies you c...Ken, I am very confused. None of the studies you cite estimates the effects of interventions on changes in proficiency. And you are comparing classroom level standard deviations with individual-level effect sizes and putting them on the same distribution? What am I missing?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com