tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post4968848783627854911..comments2023-11-13T04:55:40.769-05:00Comments on Tuttle SVC: Gee, and I Thought Money Alone Would Fix SchoolsTom Hoffmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-1901752736931226922008-01-17T09:25:00.000-05:002008-01-17T09:25:00.000-05:00Bill,That sounds right. I do basically agree with...Bill,<BR/><BR/>That sounds right. I do basically agree with the goals of the report, given how they've framed the problem.Tom Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-24055074653444498622008-01-17T00:00:00.000-05:002008-01-17T00:00:00.000-05:00OK, I'll rephraseMcKinsey is not cheap but its und...OK, I'll rephrase<BR/><BR/>McKinsey is not cheap but its underlying rationale is a cost-benefit analysis. ie. we should be running schools like intelligent bosses run their business. Education has moved up the ladder in terms of importance to your countries place on the OECD productivity lists. So, its time to sell realistic but achievable suggestions for reform which is expensive but not too expensive. Disadvantaged schools will remain screwed because they are the ones that need smaller class sizes.<BR/><BR/>(please read this independent of your disagreement with ewan)Bill Kerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-42568012289597368062008-01-10T22:31:00.000-05:002008-01-10T22:31:00.000-05:00If there was a proposal on the table in, say, Scot...If there was a proposal on the table in, say, Scotland, to slash class sizes as the sole driver of education reform, and it was sufficiently far along that it provided a baseline for the cost of reform, in that context you might be able to say the McKinsey proposals are no more expensive, maybe a little cheaper.<BR/><BR/>But if the baseline is the US status quo, it is all pretty clearly more expensive, particularly if you aren't living a fantasy land where middle class parents would accept their childrens' class sizes going up. Or the fantasy land where you start the drive to increase the status of teachers by unilaterally firing a bunch of them to cut costs.Tom Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-35789139823890520392008-01-10T17:20:00.000-05:002008-01-10T17:20:00.000-05:00tom: this study says "spending money alone will no...tom: this study says "spending money alone will not improve your schools, but we are going to recommend doing several things to improve schools which will be expensive."<BR/><BR/>Not quite right. It is saying that it can be done with less expense than you might have thought. ie. rather than reduce class sizes reform the teacher selection process to improve teacher quality. Spend other dollars strategically to improve the status of teachers (huge problem)<BR/><BR/>ie. if we play our cards right we can get smarter teachers to work harder and not leave the profession for less or equivalent dollars than what we are currently doing (reducing class size)<BR/><BR/>tom:<BR/>Those aren't three quick steps. That's a generational scale change. Step one is reforming pre-service education for teachers, which is itself a microcosm of the problems of schooling in general<BR/><BR/><BR/>What McKinsey recommends is to decouple teacher selection from the microcosm of the problems in schools in general. There is some sleight of hand here, which I see as the real weakness of the report <BR/><BR/>Kinsey recommends copying Finland and Singapore. Select quality teachers before teacher training starts, not afterwards. This is the equivalent of what Private Schools do in Australia -->> get rid of the problem students to improve the learning environment for the remainder<BR/><BR/>McKinsey:<BR/>"... the quality of any classroom experience is highly dependent on the quality of people in the classroom"<BR/><BR/>McKinsey sees this wrt teacher selection but then fudges the same point when it comes to achievement for all. The final part of the report ("delivering for every child") is highly suspect because exactly the same considerations apply but this time for students in disadvantaged schoolsBill Kerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-7886039806108041872008-01-08T04:43:00.000-05:002008-01-08T04:43:00.000-05:00Having gone back and re-read Ewan's piece, I still...Having gone back and re-read Ewan's piece, I still see it as a reporting of something he's read - which is, of course, what he says at the start. For one, I haven't read the original at all and therefore am indebted to Ewan for sharing what it says. I've just done the same on my own blog, in a lesser sort of way - quoted someone verbatim and drawn a small parallel with my own thinking without making any further comment. I don't regard that as "spin". (You can check for yourself - I'm not going to spam you with a link!)Christine McIntoshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14198224025775398453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-30923316499524513002008-01-07T20:42:00.000-05:002008-01-07T20:42:00.000-05:00Well, why emphasize cost at all? For McKinsey it ...Well, why emphasize cost at all? For McKinsey it is obvious: lower taxes and privatization benefits them and their clients, so before describing a bunch of reforms which, in the US would be expensive to implement, they assert out front that spending money is not the answer, despite the fact that every thing else they subsequently discuss costs money. They aren't lying, they just try to throw you off the trail in the intro.<BR/><BR/>The question is, why would Ewan want to perpetuate that angle, and in addition, go beyond the report in emphasizing that these are relatively quick and easy changes. Well, perhaps he's just trying to internalize the worldview of a business consultant. But I don't think it is quite that. I think what is really going on is that as a consultant Ewan needs to have a pitch that does not require extra money and seems easy and fast if we just have "the will and brains." That's what it feels like he is laying the groundwork for, that's the spin.Tom Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-16681638266292146002008-01-07T18:42:00.000-05:002008-01-07T18:42:00.000-05:00What spin? Don't get it.What spin? Don't get it.Christine McIntoshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14198224025775398453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-36703420634706305332008-01-07T16:24:00.000-05:002008-01-07T16:24:00.000-05:00I just find your spin on it to be weird.I just find your spin on it to be weird.Tom Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-90903241175503708112008-01-07T16:11:00.000-05:002008-01-07T16:11:00.000-05:00But Tom - I'm merely stating what's in the report....But Tom - I'm merely stating what's in the report. Read it.<BR/><BR/>Personally, I do think smaller class sizes are better for the teacher, leaving more time for research, planning and thinking with having less marking to do and less energy, arguably, on managing the work of the class.<BR/><BR/>However, I am inclined to believe that the differences in education systems' performance is down to more than just money, since some of those doing the best are spending less than some of those doing rather badly. Curious, I find, and an indicator that money must be being spent on different things in different places with different results.<BR/><BR/>I wanted to know what those different things were - the report is trying to tell us.Ewan McIntoshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12885676413351678827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-39750006251075913802008-01-07T15:57:00.000-05:002008-01-07T15:57:00.000-05:00No, I still don't understand the spin. This repor...No, I still don't understand the spin. This report doesn't confirm what teachers have known in their gut for ages, at least not the teachers I know. Teachers think that small class sizes are good and worthwhile. Teachers think more money needs to be spent on education. Teachers think more autonomy for schools is good. Teachers don't generally think that the problem with education is that they and their peers are not smart enough and poorly trained and that they need a lot more professional development. Teachers generally don't favor flatter payscales, etc., etc., etc.Tom Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577165613934129833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7719550.post-58761054961196488492008-01-07T13:22:00.000-05:002008-01-07T13:22:00.000-05:00No 'Scottish spin' on this one - read the report f...No 'Scottish spin' on this one - read the report first and you'll see that I am, 99% of the time, just the messenger.<BR/><BR/>I think it's pretty clear that, as Stephen pointed out on his blog, the message is mostly to those spending the money to take stock of what they are spending it on. 'Throwing' money at education doesn't make a big difference. Targetting areas for development does.<BR/><BR/>I know. Big deal. Teachers have known this for ages. But here is an international study that backs up what teachers have known in their gut for all this time.<BR/><BR/>Also, American schools could do a lot worse than try to emulate France, a country with an intellectual heritage and school system many would be quite happy to claim as their own.Ewan McIntoshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12885676413351678827noreply@blogger.com