Not So Super-majority

If you've been haunting this blog, you know that adequate funding for schools is a major issue in this state (as in, the state doesn't pony up what it should). One result of this is that districts have come to rely more and more heavily upon local levy dollars. And if that weren't enough of an issue to manage, a levy can only be passed by a supermajority (60%+) of voters.

The supermajority requirement was in place long before NCLB, technology, and many modern school needs. It was originally conceived in 1932 and became a part of the state constitution in 1944. This makes changes to the rule much more difficult.

Washington state is one step closer to overturning this practice. State legislators were able to work together enough to have an amendment added to the voters' ballot in November. (There only needs to be a simple majority to pass it, oddly enough.) Many districts are gearing up for public relations efforts in order to get the message out that children and schools need their help.

There is plenty more to read in an article in The Columbian. How will your district encourage voters to make themselves more easily taxed in the name of providing a quality education?

on the shallowness of rankings

Teacher, ref and poet TRP on Newsweek's "Best Public High Schools:"

Jay Mathews, an education writer, measures something worthwhile when he divides the number of AP tests given in a given year by they number of graduating seniors. The resulting number indicates something about rigor and challenge. But "Best High Schools?" Ick. You could totally screw over every special-ed student, every potential artist, have horrible student-teacher rapport, crumbling facilities, and any number of other shortcomings, and be considered a "great" school. The reverse is true. The high school that prepares my autistic nephew for success in the world doesn't register on the list. So while I don't mind Mathews' formula, and believe schools should strive to score well on it, I think printing it under the title "Best American High Schools" is journalistic malpractice.

It's no surprise that many of the institutions listed at the top are "magnet schools," which really deserve a category of their own. Also, schools that don't offer AP or IB, no matter how outstanding their performance, simply don't make the list. This may be a heretical question, but are AP and IB the summit of educational rigor?

Soldiering on in the Battle of the Sexes

The Clark County Columbian recently published an article which reaffirms what we already know: boys and girls have differently wired brains. What is unclear, however, is how we as an educational system should respond to this. Most school districts show a "gender gap" in their test scores. If there is a physiological reason for this, there isn't much a classroom teacher can do to make a difference.

I was chatting with some teachers recently about student behavior in the hallways. There were several comments about touching, slapping, horseplay---and I had to ask if this was primarily observable in boys. This is one of the main ways in which young men communicate and as schools, we do our darndest to stop them. I'm not saying that any behaviors which might be dangerous to others should be tolerated, but at some point we have to honor their needs. I worry that schools have overcompensated in recent decades to be far too "girl friendly" for learning. How do we make the playing field a level one?