9486 in the collection  

School Ratings? Say 'Ah'

With the forests of pulp expended on school reform, no one has come up with anything approximating the link between sports utility vehicles and student achievement.

This is self-evident. At the afternoon bell, go to the school near you. If it has a plus ratio of SUVs to economy cars or junkers waiting for the children, it will be rated high.

If the SUV ratio is in the minus, it is at risk of being a "failing" school at which "standards" are not as lofty as schools with high SUV ratios.

Yes, we know that some schools in the minus side, SUV-wise, manage to get rated "exemplary." But no school in the plus-side, SUV-wise, is ever rated "failing" or "dangerous," or used in the "burning-building" analogy by proponents of consumerist policies like school vouchers.

Based on how we rate schools, it's the same thing with teachers who "can't teach." With a high statistical linkage, you could rate teachers' ability by how their students got to school. Delivered by SUV? Great teachers. Students delivered by crosstown bus? By truant officer? Those teachers aren't as skilled, based on the "accountability" system we hail.

I dare you to find any student achievement/teacher excellence correlation that compares to the SUV plus-minus ratio.

Indeed, it is so ironclad as to apply to all institutions and professions. To rate the professional — from attorney to plumber — just look at the cars of the clientele.

But we don't have to use SUVs. We could use, say, tooth decay.

----Pass-fail for dentists----

There's a conversation circulating on the Internet about a state/federal program to rate dentists. You just count the number of cavities each patient has at age 10, 14 and 18, and average to determine a dentist’s rating. Dentists rated "poor" risk losing their licenses.

“That’s not fair,” says a dentist. “I work in an area with a high percentage of deprived homes. Many of the parents I work with don’t bring their children to see me until there is some kind of problem. I can't do any preventive work.

"Also, many of the parents I serve let their kids eat way too much candy from an early age, unlike more educated parents who understand the relationship between sugar and decay."

Excuses. Excuses.

“How else to measure good dentistry?” the dentist is asked. The questioner obviously is fishing for a method comparable to how government rates teachers.

“Come watch me work,” the dentist pleads. “Observe my processes.”

“That’s too complicated and time-consuming,” says the non-dentist. “Cavities are the bottom line, and you can’t argue with the bottom line. It’s an absolute measure.”

What happens if the dentist gets rated "failing" based on conditions beyond his control? Answer: The government sends an "excellent"-rated dentist to help straighten him out.

“You mean,” says the dentist, “they’ll send a dentist with a wealthy clientele to show me how to work on severe dental problems with which I have much more experience?"

Complain, complain. What? Are you opposed to accountability?

OK, there's no such rating of dentists. That would be absurd. But such a system would serve politicians who feel that public dental care is best done through a voucher system to aid a cavity-prone patient "trapped" with a failing dentist.

Actually, education reformers could do the same. Just look in the mouths of the students. If the cavity ratio is high, make them eligible for vouchers to schools where there are fewer cavities and the SUV ratio is optimum.

With forests of pulp expended on "accountability" it's reassuring to know there are always yardsticks of excellence on which you can count.



— John Young
School Ratings? Say 'Ah'
Waco Tribune
2003-11-30
http://www.wacotrib.com/news/newsfd/auto/feed/news/2003/11/30/1070174458.20005.9360.0860.html;COXnetJSessionID=1PSdtv2XVqIkZENKQqNARlU5atHr3MtNb2LAvKv

---

INDEX OF OUTRAGES

Pages: 380   
[1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next >>    Last >>