Yi-ching, if you think this is cold, you are in for a wintery surprise!
I am currently organizing our discussion questions. I'm sending out an email to our gmail accounts with the redone lesson plan now with discussion questions!
Go Team Awesome!
So:
1) We have our opening activity--groups chose what to purchase for their project
2) Follow-up questions: ask gropus how they went about deciding what to purchase, ask how it impacted their results
3) Have them free-write for 3-5 minutes about their beliefs regarding money and impact on student performance and future job earning potential--share with group.
4) As a large group, ask for responses and specifically why they believe what they do about money/result.
------------
5) Snowman activity( about 30 min)(divide class into 3 group)
criterion
1. four facial creature( eye and eyebrow only count one)
2. 12inch in height
3.1 cloth required
4. self stand( for how long?)
6) large group sharing
A-ha monent
Things to consider: Evaluative Curricula
1) Does it value learned experiences?
2) Does it value a particular culture/group of people over others?
3) Does it allow students to confront their personal bias?
4) Is it leading students towards a particular idea/concept? If so, is this concept/idea biased?
Just some ideas of evaluative curricula!
1) Does it value learned experiences?
2) Does it value a particular culture/group of people over others?
3) Does it allow students to confront their personal bias?
4) Is it leading students towards a particular idea/concept? If so, is this concept/idea biased?
Just some ideas of evaluative curricula!
So:
1) We have our opening activity--groups chose what to purchase for their project
2) Follow-up questions: ask gropus how they went about deciding what to purchase, ask how it impacted their results
3) Have them free-write for 3-5 minutes about their beliefs regarding money and impact on student performance and future job earning potential--share with group.
4) As a large group, ask for responses and specifically why they believe what they do about money/result.
5) Ask our guiding questions--do we want these to be on the board and individuals to work in groups/discuss? Do we want to do this as a large group?
This is only a sample-what do you think?
Ch 6, Betts compares the literature and studies about school spending, graduates' future earnings and education attainment. He finds that the students study in better schools increase earnings. However, the studies do not show there is a significant correlation between increase spending per pupils and education attainment.
The economic concept, diminishing marginal return is used in this chapter. Increase in additional school inputs may have diminished utility in returns. He points out the unionization among teachers and the influence of bureaucracies in public schools lower efficiency of public schools (p.170). Thus, increase in school resources is not equivalent to increase in education attainment. The issue of utilizing school resources to pupils is crucial. Not blindly increase the additional spending!
On the other hand, Betts finds that the estimated benefit cost ratio to keep a student in school (or college)an extra year is strikingly higher than the benefit cost ratio of increasing spending per pupil (p.184). Keeping the students still in school can benefits students' future earnings. In light of this, Betts suggests develop policies designed to encourage students to stay in school longer. And this kind of policies requires extra expenditure.
Increase in school resources is still necessary, because it can lower the drop out rate of schools. I agree with Betts' argument that the utility of school resources and the effects of families and peers affect student educational attainment. However, I have questions about finding a clear and accurate statistic about effects of families and peers on student educational attainment. In what way, can we exclude the other factors and just focus on school input on students? If the factors are interrelated, in other words, we cannot separate them.
Two more guiding question ideas:
1) Why do you think that there has been increased resources but not increased student performance in school?
2) It it isn't the resources...what is it? It has to be beyond money, beyond smaller class sizes and beyond more teacher resources.
Perhaps we as a group need to also come up with some alternative hypothesi--I suspect the social climate may play a role...that theory has nothing to go on...I need to think on it more.
Sorry folks, I have been in the throes of swine flue and then had to go to Boston so I have been out of action for awhile. That being said, I am out of the loop! Could somebody explain the Christmas Tree decorating to me? Is this as our "activity" with the tools? Sounds fine to me...or we could make snowmen or decorate a menorah or other such candelabrum...but that is just the Jew in me talking...:)
I like the pre-discussion activity!
I don't know if we want to ask questions regarding inequitable state-by-state funding. I feel that broadens our intent.
Perhaps we should focus on questions that ask them:
1) What, in their opinion, does funding affect at their schools?
2) Do they see a disparity in fund distribution? Why do you think this is? Create a list of potential causes.
3) Do you think school resources impact student success/student competitiveness?
4) What is your reaction to the correclation or lack thereof between school resources and student earning?
These are just ideas--I think that these studies challenge some of our accepted beliefs about funding and I think we should shake them up, create a little "crisis".
In terms of success after school, I agree, it isn't as simple as that. I think that what is discounted in the literature are the number of resources beyond the financial which attribute to student success after school. A student's individual ability to build connections, "play the game:, a student's individual drive. In addition, the power of family connections, school name and professorial recommendations cannot be discredited when consdiering success. Although funding may not literally influence student success, certainly other power symbols do.
As I re-read the readings we are going to ask the class to read, I notice there is an emphasis on the notion that more school funding does not exactly equal greater school success. However, there is an emphasis on the fact that students who attended schools that received more funding tended to earn more in the workplace after they graduated school. Do you think that's just because of socioeconomic status? I mean, students who attend heavily funded schools probably live in more affluent areas, so they are more likely to earn more money and become part of the higher socioeconomic class they were born into. Whereas, students from average-funded schools will most likely go on to earn a middle-class income and so forth. Thoughts? It just seems like it's a whole big package, and you can't pick it apart to just school funding being the determining factor in a student's success. You have to factor in social capital from home and social class as well.
Recent Comments