Collaboration??

The part of the article that caught my eye was the statement, "It's a
system
that was implemented in the public schools in Edmonton, Canada, and is
now
being copied in large part and with reported success in school
districts in
Houston and Seattle. Leaders of those districts outlined the results."

It occurs to me, that it would have been nice if the paper had told us
what
"success" means. As I have been talking about this subject matter, if
"success" was a year to year increase in the standardized test scores,
that
would be what I would call success.

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:

> The part of the article that caught my eye was the
> statement, "It's a system that was implemented in the
> public schools in Edmonton, Canada, and is now being
> copied in large part and with reported success in
> school districts in Houston and Seattle. Leaders of
> those districts outlined the results."
>
> It occurs to me, that it would have been nice if the
> paper had told us what "success" means. As I have
> been talking about this subject matter, if "success"
> was a year to year increase in the standardized test
> scores, that would be what I would call success.

What about equal funding for the schools? Suppose each
district in Hawaii had to generate it's own revenue.
Schools in Hana would be closed down. Suppose each
district had its own board and bureaucracy. Would the
relative administrative costs be much higher then? And
in the end, isn't it the individual principal no matter
what the system of administration of the schools, that
counts? The bottom line should also be considered,
because we see the results here in priviate schools
which spend twice as much per pupil as the public
schools.

--alvin

"Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1065586811-sch@news.lava.net...
>
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:
>
>> The part of the article that caught my eye was the
>> statement, "It's a system that was implemented in the
>> public schools in Edmonton, Canada, and is now being
>> copied in large part and with reported success in
>> school districts in Houston and Seattle. Leaders of
>> those districts outlined the results."
>>
>> It occurs to me, that it would have been nice if the
>> paper had told us what "success" means. As I have
>> been talking about this subject matter, if "success"
>> was a year to year increase in the standardized test
>> scores, that would be what I would call success.
>
> What about equal funding for the schools? Suppose each
> district in Hawaii had to generate it's own revenue.
> Schools in Hana would be closed down. Suppose each
> district had its own board and bureaucracy. Would the
> relative administrative costs be much higher then? And
> in the end, isn't it the individual principal no matter
> what the system of administration of the schools, that
> counts? The bottom line should also be considered,
> because we see the results here in priviate schools
> which spend twice as much per pupil as the public
> schools.
>
All I asked was a simple question. In the context of the article, what
does
success mean. Yes, there can be other measures of "success". All I
wondered about what what did they mean by success.

As for equal funding for schools, doesn't this depend on what we want?
After all, there is no equal funding for schools across State lines.
So,
why is it important to have equal funding within the State. Besides, is
there ever equal funding, even within a State? As for whether each
school
should be independent, isn't that what is being discussed at the State
level, i.e. how much control should a central beauracracy have over the
entire State? As for funding disparaties, I will once again, refer
back to
my previous comments, if funding is so important, explain why in
California,
the Southeast Asians seem to have been so successful.

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:

> "Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:1065586811-sch@news.lava.net...
> >
> >
> > What about equal funding for the schools? Suppose
> > each district in Hawaii had to generate it's own
> > revenue. Schools in Hana would be closed down.
> > Suppose each district had its own board and
> > bureaucracy. Would the relative administrative
> > costs be much higher then? And in the end, isn't it
> > the individual principal no matter what the system
> > of administration of the schools, that counts? The
> > bottom line should also be considered, because we
> > see the results here in priviate schools which
> > spend twice as much per pupil as the public
> > schools.
> >
> All I asked was a simple question. In the context of
> the article, what does success mean. Yes, there can
> be other measures of "success". All I wondered about
> what what did they mean by success.

Why do you presume that they only used one measure? My
point is that it would be more likely that they used a
number of measures.

> As for equal funding for schools, doesn't this depend
> on what we want? After all, there is no equal funding
> for schools across State lines. So, why is it
> important to have equal funding within the State.
> Besides, is there ever equal funding, even within a
> State? As for whether each school should be
> independent, isn't that what is being discussed at
> the State level, i.e. how much control should a
> central beauracracy have over the entire State? As
> for funding disparaties, I will once again, refer
> back to my previous comments, if funding is so
> important, explain why in California, the Southeast
> Asians seem to have been so successful.

Jerry, I think you are getting into your favorite thing
with the importance of family when you mention SE
Asians?

Yes, currently, the disagreement is over independence,
and whether we are willing to pay more for greater
bureaucracy if independence will help so much. There's
this guy Ouchi that's acting a leader in this forum.
The legislature did offer a plan for local
administration by school complex (ie by high school and
all the feeder schools into the high school. I think we
now have seven districts. That reorganization would
have created 17 school complexes with their own
advisory boards, for the 300+ schools in the state.
This is still much less than a governing board for each
school-- another alternative considered in the forum, I
guess) in the last session, which Lingle vetoed. But I
would expect that that idea should be on the table as
well as other ideas during the forum.

I think the point of this discussion is that in this
area, there is great agreement that there needs to be
reform. Elements of that reform that both Lingle and
the Legislature can support, should be adopted. This
kind of collaboration wont happen if Lingle and
legislators argue about whether she did or did not
invite them to the forum. What kind of invitation was
sent out if the leaders of the legislature were unaware
of the forum, while Lingle insists that all were
invited??

--alvin

"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.> wrote in message
news:1065670501-sch@news.lava.net...
>
>
> "Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:1065586811-sch@news.lava.net...
>>
>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:
>>
>>> The part of the article that caught my eye was the
>>> statement, "It's a system that was implemented in the
>>> public schools in Edmonton, Canada, and is now being
>>> copied in large part and with reported success in
>>> school districts in Houston and Seattle. Leaders of
>>> those districts outlined the results."
>>>
>>> It occurs to me, that it would have been nice if the
>>> paper had told us what "success" means. As I have
>>> been talking about this subject matter, if "success"
>>> was a year to year increase in the standardized test
>>> scores, that would be what I would call success.
>>
>> What about equal funding for the schools? Suppose each
>> district in Hawaii had to generate it's own revenue.
>> Schools in Hana would be closed down. Suppose each
>> district had its own board and bureaucracy. Would the
>> relative administrative costs be much higher then? And
>> in the end, isn't it the individual principal no matter
>> what the system of administration of the schools, that
>> counts? The bottom line should also be considered,
>> because we see the results here in priviate schools
>> which spend twice as much per pupil as the public
>> schools.
>>
> All I asked was a simple question. In the context of the article, what
> does
> success mean. Yes, there can be other measures of "success". All I
> wondered about what what did they mean by success.
>
> As for equal funding for schools, doesn't this depend on what we want?
> After all, there is no equal funding for schools across State lines.
> So,
> why is it important to have equal funding within the State. Besides,
> is
> there ever equal funding, even within a State? As for whether each
> school
> should be independent, isn't that what is being discussed at the State
> level, i.e. how much control should a central beauracracy have over the
> entire State? As for funding disparaties, I will once again, refer
> back to
> my previous comments, if funding is so important, explain why in
> California,
> the Southeast Asians seem to have been so successful.

They (SEA) are also highly successful along the Gulf Coast of the
mainland....much to the dismay of the local good ole boys and their
status
quo.....

Brokem

"Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1065730816-sch@news.lava.net...
>
>>>
>> All I asked was a simple question. In the context of
>> the article, what does success mean. Yes, there can
>> be other measures of "success". All I wondered about
>> what what did they mean by success.
>
> Why do you presume that they only used one measure? My
> point is that it would be more likely that they used a
> number of measures.

I don't know how many measures they used, and niether do you. If you
don't
care, so be it. I did.
>
As
>> for funding disparaties, I will once again, refer
>> back to my previous comments, if funding is so
>> important, explain why in California, the Southeast
>> Asians seem to have been so successful.
>
> Jerry, I think you are getting into your favorite thing
> with the importance of family when you mention SE
> Asians?

Yep. But I keep harping on their example, simply because those on the
left
keep saying that the "solution" to the problem of education is to throw
more
money at the problem, and the right says the "solution" are things like
standardized testing, or school choice. My point is, that in my
opinion,
neither is right, as long as parents seem to use school as an nursery.

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:

> "Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:1065730816-sch@news.lava.net...
>>
>> Why do you presume that they only used one measure?
>> My point is that it would be more likely that they
>> used a number of measures.
>
> I don't know how many measures they used, and niether
> do you. If you don't care, so be it. I did.

There's no harm in asking. But who can argue with
success? It doesn't really matter how they measure it,
as long as they are happy with the results.

In the case of different alternatives for Hawaii, I
think the decision should rest on what is best by what
measures we choose to use. We have different concerns
than Seattle, and there may be serious adverse
consequences to blindly copying methods from elsewhere.

>> Jerry, I think you are getting into your favorite
>> thing with the importance of family when you
>> mention SE Asians?
>
> Yep. But I keep harping on their example, simply
> because those on the left keep saying that the
> "solution" to the problem of education is to throw
> more money at the problem, and the right says the
> "solution" are things like standardized testing, or
> school choice. My point is, that in my opinion,
> neither is right, as long as parents seem to use
> school as an nursery.

Here, we have a diversity of cultures, and the values
of the even SEAs are being eroded in the younger
generation. Parents don't always have the best values
for high academic success here in Hawaii, because we
have other values which we consider important, or the
parents may just be kind of irresponsible.

Choice of alternatives should take this into
consideration-- ie that we would want good results in
spite of the parents. Lets keep our suggestions to
something realistic? It doesn't hurt to praise what
is obviously so successful, but we should realise the
limitations of the real world.

--alvin

"Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1065819917-sch@news.lava.net...
>
>
> There's no harm in asking. But who can argue with
> success? It doesn't really matter how they measure it,
> as long as they are happy with the results.

In other words, your position is, if someone calls something a "success"
then by definition it is a "success"? And that all of us who read such
articles, should act like automatons, and accept that fact?
>
> In the case of different alternatives for Hawaii, I
> think the decision should rest on what is best by what
> measures we choose to use. We have different concerns
> than Seattle, and there may be serious adverse
> consequences to blindly copying methods from elsewhere.

I have not problems with that.
>
>>> Jerry, I think you are getting into your favorite
>>> thing with the importance of family when you
>>> mention SE Asians?
>>
>> Yep. But I keep harping on their example, simply
>> because those on the left keep saying that the
>> "solution" to the problem of education is to throw
>> more money at the problem, and the right says the
>> "solution" are things like standardized testing, or
>> school choice. My point is, that in my opinion,
>> neither is right, as long as parents seem to use
>> school as an nursery.
>
>
> Choice of alternatives should take this into
> consideration-- ie that we would want good results in
> spite of the parents. Lets keep our suggestions to
> something realistic?

How do we know if we changed the dynamics of the debate and start
talking
about the critical importance of the parents in their childs education,
that
we could not see a dramatic change in the attitudes of parents. And if
I am
right, a big improvement in the education of the child. What is the
goal
here?

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:

> "Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:1065819917-sch@news.lava.net...
> >
> > There's no harm in asking. But who can argue with
> > success? It doesn't really matter how they measure
> > it, as long as they are happy with the results.
>
> In other words, your position is, if someone calls
> something a "success" then by definition it is a
> "success"? And that all of us who read such
> articles, should act like automatons, and accept that
> fact?

No. I mean we shouldn't doubt whether they are "happy"
or not. They have have their own meansure of success,
and that has been satisfied.

> > In the case of different alternatives for Hawaii, I
> > think the decision should rest on what is best by
> > what measures we choose to use. We have different
> > concerns than Seattle, and there may be serious
> > adverse consequences to blindly copying methods
> > from elsewhere.
>
> I have not problems with that.
> >
> > Choice of alternatives should take this into
> > consideration-- ie that we would want good results in
> > spite of the parents. Lets keep our suggestions to
> > something realistic?
>
> How do we know if we changed the dynamics of the
> debate and start talking about the critical
> importance of the parents in their childs education,
> that we could not see a dramatic change in the
> attitudes of parents. And if I am right, a big
> improvement in the education of the child. What is
> the goal here?

Optimistic aren't you? Any action the schools can take
has to be purely voluntary on the part of the parents.
And suppose parents with kids in trouble choose not to
be accessible or cooperative?? How can you change their
attitudes if you can't even talk with them?

--alvin

"Alvin E. Toda" <aet@lava.net> wrote in message
news:1065909904-sch@news.lava.net...
>
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003, Jerry Okamura wrote:
>
> >
> > In other words, your position is, if someone calls
> > something a "success" then by definition it is a
> > "success"? And that all of us who read such
> > articles, should act like automatons, and accept that
> > fact?
>
> No. I mean we shouldn't doubt whether they are "happy"
> or not. They have have their own meansure of success,
> and that has been satisfied.
>
So, if any special interest group, or any news organization says that
something is a success, espeically when you strongly disagree with that
conclusion, are we to believe that you would consider it a success because
someone said it was.

> >
> > How do we know if we changed the dynamics of the
> > debate and start talking about the critical
> > importance of the parents in their childs education,
> > that we could not see a dramatic change in the
> > attitudes of parents. And if I am right, a big
> > improvement in the education of the child. What is
> > the goal here?
>
> Optimistic aren't you? Any action the schools can take
> has to be purely voluntary on the part of the parents.
> And suppose parents with kids in trouble choose not to
> be accessible or cooperative?? How can you change their
> attitudes if you can't even talk with them?
>
Actually, I am not very optimistic, as long as the debate on how to improve
our system of education is focused on those steps that people believe will
achieve the results we are all seeking.