Schools right here in Rhinebeck, Clinton, Dutchess County, New York State, and, in fact, all over the United States need to delay no longer in stopping the implementation of so-called, test-obsessed "Common Core"-- and start following the incredibly successful Finnish educational model.

Fact: School achievement test scores in Finland put American school test scores to shame-- because Finland's truly student-centered model of education truly respects children/kids/youth there (and teachers as well) as individuals and human beings-- not mere cogs-to-be for a corporate machine to eat up and integrate; see:

"26 Amazing Facts About Finland's Unorthodox Education System"
by Adam Taylor [Business Insider 12/14/11]                         http://www.businessinsider.com/finland-education-school-2011-12

"From Finland, an Intriguing School-Reform Model" by Jenny Anderson
[New York Times 12/12/11]                                   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/education/from-finland-an-intriguing-school-reform-model.html?_r=0

"Finland Has An Educational System the U.S. Should Envy-- and Learn From" by Linda Moore [The Guardian 2/15/13] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/15/us-education-reform-lessons-from-finland

"Why Are Finland's School's Successful?" by LynNell Hancock [Smithsonian magazine Sept. 2011] http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/Why-Are-Finlands-Schools-Successful.html

"What We Can Learn from Finland's Successful School Reform" by Linda Darling-Hammond [National Education Association] http://www.nea.org/home/40991.htm 

"Finland's Education System: 10 Surprising Facts That Americans Shouldn't Ignore"                       by Andrew Freeman [Take Part 8/14/12]                                     http://www.takepart.com/photos/ten-surprising-facts-finlands-education-system-americans-should-not-ignore/finland-knows-whats-best

"Teacher Education in Finland" by Diane Ravitch [9/15/03]                   http://dianeravitch.net/2013/09/15/teacher-education-in-finland/

"The Trouble with the Common Core" [Rethinking Schools editorial Summer 2013]
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/27_04/edit274.shtml

"The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards: No Evidence" by Diane Ravitch [8/24/13] http://dianeravitch.net/2013/08/24/the-biggest-fallacy-of-the-common-core-standards-no-evidence/

"Leading Educational Scholar Diane Ravitch: No Child Left Behind Has Left U.S. Schools with Legacy of 'Institutionalized Fraud'" [Democracy Now 3/5/10] http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/5/protests 

"Bill Gates Money and Common Core: Part VI" by Mercedes Schneider [Huffington Post 10/7/13] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mercedes-schneider/gates-money-and-common-co_4_b_4050075.html

Call Governor Cuomo and state legislators at 877-255-9417!

[pass it on]

Joel Tyner                                                                                                               Dutchess County Legislator (Clinton/Rhinebeck)                                                                   324 Browns Pond Road                                                                                               Staatsburg, NY 12580                                                                                                   (845) 876-2488/453-2105                                                                           joeltyner@earthlink.net                                                                 DutchessDemocracy.blogspot.com                                                                                   Host of WHVW.com 950 AM's "Common Sense" Saturdays 8-11 am

[26 years of successful/effective experience working with students in public                                 and private schools from the Bronx to Hudson to Kingston to Poughkeepsie to                           Millbrook to Woodstock to New Paltz to Rhinebeck to Hyde Park-- all over!]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

http://coopcatalyst.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/parenting-magazines-mom-congress-2012-and-finnish-education/

 

you're reading...

 

Learning at its Best Parenting Magazine’s Mom Congress 2012 and Finnish Education Posted by Gwyn Ridenhour ⋅ May 5, 2012 ⋅
    Last week I had the privilege of attending Parenting Magazine’s Mom Congress 2012 conference in Washington, DC as the delegate from North Dakota. Parenting selected one delegate from each state, flew us in, hosted and fed us, and introduced us to some of the most dedicated and intelligent folks in the country who are working to make a positive difference in their communities’ education practices. I am honored to have been a part.

Lots of amazing people were there, including education correspondent for NBC Rehema Ellis, US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, White House chef Sam Kass (he spoke on nutrition), and CEOs and founders of several fabulous national and international programs that support the education and well-being of children. Salman Khan produced and shared a video introduction to his work specifically for this conference. It was full and amazing, and I was refreshed to see how many positive efforts were going around me every day.

The speaker who I found most fascinating, was Anu Partanen (in photo at right), a journalist and author of “What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland’s School Success.” If you haven’t read this article, it’s worth taking the time. Finland is outpacing the US in education success, and their model is quite different from our own. Many of their practices are easy to digest for me; they are what I regularly advocate. But some are frankly more uncomfortable. Although no model will fit every culture, there are points to consider and examine, and I will share some of the more intriguing ones here:

1. Finland does not give their kids standardized tests.
2. Individual schools have curriculum autonomy; individual teachers have classroom autonomy.
3. It is not mandatory to give students grades until they are in the 8th grade.
4. All teachers are required to have a master’s degree.
5. Finland does not have a culture of negative accountability for their teachers. According to Partanen, “bad” teachers receive more professional development; they are not threatened with being fired.
6. Finland has a culture of collaboration between schools, not competition. Most schools, according to Partanen, perform at the same level, so there is no status in attending a particular facility.
7. Finland has no private schools.
8. Education emphasis is “equal opportunity to all.” They value equality over excellence.
9. A much higher percentage of Finland’s educational budget goes directly into the classroom than it does in the US, as administrators make approximately the same salary as teachers. This also makes Finland’s education more affordable than it is in the US.
10. Finnish culture values childhood independence; one example: children mostly get themselves to school on their own, by walking or bicycling, etc. Helicopter parenting isn’t really in their vocabulary.
11. Finnish schools don’t assign homework, because it is assumed that mastery is attained in the classroom.
12. Finnish schools have sports, but no sports teams. Competition is not valued.
13. The focus is on the individual child. If a child is falling behind, the highly trained teaching staff recognizes this need and immediately creates a plan to address the child’s individual needs. Likewise, if a child is soaring ahead and bored, the staff is trained and prepared to appropriately address this as well.
14. Partanen correlated the methods and success of their public schools to US private schools. We already have a model right here at home.
15. Compulsory school in Finland doesn’t begin until children are 7 years old.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.businessinsider.com/finland-education-school-2011-12 ...

26 Amazing Facts About Finland's Unorthodox Education System ADAM TAYLOR DEC. 14, 2011, 9:00 PM 
​

 

flickr: wstryder

 

Since it implemented huge education reforms 40 years ago, Finland's school system has consistently come at the top for the international rankings for education systems.

 

So how do they do it?

It's simple — by going against the evaluation-driven, centralized model that much of the Western world uses.

Finnish children don't start school until they are 7.

Elinag / Shutterstock.com

(Source: NYtimes)

Compared with other systems, they rarely take exams or do homework until they are well into their teens.

Flickr

(Source: NYTimes)

The children are not measured at all for the first six years of their education.

Shutterstock / BlueOrangeStudio

(Source: NYTimes)

There is only one mandatory standardized test in Finland, taken when children are 16.

Getty: Tony Lewis

(Source: Smithsonian)

All children, clever or not, are taught in the same classrooms.

(Source: Smithsonian)

Finland spends around 30 percent less per student than the United States.

(Source: Smithsonian)

30 percent of children receive extra help during their first nine years of school.

Max Topchii / Shutterstock.com

(Source: Smithsonian)

66 percent of students go to college.

Flickr/Ari Helminen

The highest rate in Europe.

(Source: Smithsonian)

The difference between weakest and strongest students is the smallest in the World.

Getty: Tony Lewis

(Source: Smithsonian)

Science classes are capped at 16 students so that they may perform practical experiments every class.

OnlineDegrees.org

(Source: TNR)

93 percent of Finns graduate from high school.

Shahram Sharif via Flickr

17.5 percent higher than the US.

(Source: Smithsonian)

43 percent of Finnish high-school students go to vocational schools.

Mika Heittola / Shutterstock.com

(Source: Smithsonian)

Elementary school students get 75 minutes of recess a day in Finnish versus an average of 27 minutes in the US.

AP

(Source: TNR)

Teachers only spend 4 hours a day in the classroom, and take 2 hours a week for "professional development".

Flickr: Leo-setä

(Source: NYTimes)

Finland has the same amount of teachers as New York City, but far fewer students.

upload.wikimedia.org

600,000 students compared to 1.1 million in NYC.

(Source: NYTimes)

The school system is 100% state funded.

Wikimedia Commons

(Source: Smithsonian)

All teachers in Finland must have a masters degree, which is fully subsidized.

Tom Plesnik / Shutterstock.com

(Source: NYTimes)

The national curriculum is only broad guidelines.

_Shward_ via Flickr

(Source: Smithsonian)

Teachers are selected from the top 10% of graduates.

Flickr

(Source: Smithsonian)

In 2010, 6,600 applicants vied for 660 primary school training slots

Nadia Virronen / Shutterstock.com

(Source: Smithsonian)

The average starting salary for a Finnish teacher was $29,000 in 2008

jeremy.wilburn via Flikr

Compared with $36,000 in the United States.

(Source: NYTimes)

However, high school teachers with 15 years of experience make 102 percent of what other college graduates make.

Natursports / Shutterstock.com

In the US, this figure is 62%.

(Source: TNR)

There is no merit pay for teachers

Anton Balazh / Shutterstock.com

(Source: TNR)

Teachers are effectively given the same status as doctors and lawyers

Flickr

(Source: Smithsonian)

In an international standardized measurement in 2001, Finnish children came top or very close to the top for science, reading and mathematics.

katutaide on flickr

It's consistently come top or very near every time since.

(Source: OECD/PISA)

And despite the differences between Finland and the US, it easily beats countries with a similar demographic

Neighbor Norway, of a similar size and featuring a similar homogeneous culture, follows the same same strategies as the USA and achieves similar rankings in international studies.

(Source: Smithsonian)

 

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/finland-education-school-2011-12?op=1#ixzz2kB72Abba 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/27_04/edit274.shtml ...

 

The Trouble with the Common Core

BY THE EDITORS OF RETHINKING SCHOOLs     summer 2013

Ethan Heitner

It isn't easy to find common ground on the Common Core. Already hailed as the “next big thing” in education reform, the Common Core State Standards are being rushed into classrooms in nearly every district in the country. Although these “world-class” standards raise substantive questions about curriculum choices and instructional practices, such educational concerns are likely to prove less significant than the role the Common Core is playing in the larger landscape of our polarized education reform politics.

We know there have been many positive claims made for the Common Core:

• That it represents a tighter set of smarter standards focused on developing critical learning skills instead of mastering fragmented bits of knowledge.
• That it requires more progressive, student-centered teaching with strong elements of collaborative and reflective learning.
• That it equalizes the playing field by raising expectations for all children, especially those suffering the worst effects of the “drill and kill” test prep norms of the recent past.

We also know that many creative, heroic teachers are seeking ways to use this latest reform wave to serve their students well. Especially in the current interim between the rollout of the standards and the arrival of the tests, some teachers have embraced the Common Core as an alternative to the scripted commercial formulas of recent experience, and are trying to use the space opened up by the Common Core transition to do positive things in their classrooms.

We'd like to believe these claims and efforts can trump the more political uses of the Common Core project. But we can't.

For starters, the misnamed “Common Core State Standards” are not state standards. They're national standards, created by Gates-funded consultants for the National Governors Association (NGA). They were designed, in part, to circumvent federal restrictions on the adoption of a national curriculum, hence the insertion of the word “state” in the brand name. States were coerced into adopting the Common Core by requirements attached to the federal Race to the Top grants and, later, the No Child Left Behind waivers. (This is one reason many conservative groups opposed to any federal role in education policy oppose the Common Core.)

Written mostly by academics and assessment experts—many with ties to testing companies—the Common Core standards have never been fully implemented and tested in real schools anywhere. Of the 135 members on the official Common Core review panels convened by Achieve Inc., the consulting firm that has directed the Common Core project for the NGA, few were classroom teachers or current administrators. Parents were entirely missing. K–12 educators were mostly brought in after the fact to tweak and endorse the standards—and lend legitimacy to the results.

The standards are tied to assessments that are still in development and that must be given on computers many schools don't have. So far, there is no research or experience to justify the extravagant claims being made for the ability of these standards to ensure that every child will graduate from high school “college and career ready.” By all accounts, the new Common Core tests will be considerably harder than current state assessments, leading to sharp drops in scores and proficiency rates.

We have seen this show before. The entire country just finished a decade-long experiment in standards-based, test-driven school reform called No Child Left Behind. NCLB required states to adopt “rigorous” curriculum standards and test students annually to gauge progress towards reaching them. Under threat of losing federal funds, all 50 states adopted or revised their standards and began testing every student, every year in every grade from 3–8 and again in high school. (Before NCLB, only 19 states tested all kids every year, after NCLB all 50 did.)

By any measure, NCLB was a dismal failure in both raising academic performance and narrowing gaps in opportunity and outcomes. But by very publicly measuring the test results against benchmarks no real schools have ever met, NCLB did succeed in creating a narrative of failure that shaped a decade of attempts to “fix” schools while blaming those who work in them. By the time the first decade of NCLB was over, more than half the schools in the nation were on the lists of “failing schools” and the rest were poised to follow.

In reality, NCLB's test scores reflected the inequality that exists all around our schools. The disaggregated scores put the spotlight on longstanding gaps in outcomes and opportunity among student subgroups. But NCLB used these gaps to label schools as failures without providing the resources or support needed to eliminate them.

The tests showed that millions of students were not meeting existing standards. Yet the conclusion drawn by sponsors of the Common Core was that the solution was “more challenging” ones. This conclusion is simply wrong. NCLB proved that the test and punish approach to education reform doesn't work, not that we need a new, tougher version of it. Instead of targeting the inequalities of race, class, and educational opportunity reflected in the test scores, the Common Core project threatens to reproduce the narrative of public school failure that has led to a decade of bad policy in the name of reform.

The engine for this potential disaster, as it was for NCLB, will be the tests, in this case the “next generation” Common Core tests being developed by two federally funded, multi-state consortia at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Although reasonable people, including many thoughtful educators we respect, have found things of value in the Common Core standards, there is no credible defense to be made of the high-stakes uses planned for these new tests.

The same heavy-handed, top-down policies that forced adoption of the standards require use of the Common Core tests to evaluate educators. This inaccurate and unreliable practice will distort the assessments before they're even in place and make Common Core implementation part of the assault on the teaching profession instead of a renewal of it. The costs of the tests, which have multiple pieces throughout the year plus the computer platforms needed to administer and score them, will be enormous and will come at the expense of more important things. The plunging scores will be used as an excuse to close more public schools and open more privatized charters and voucher schools, especially in poor communities of color. If, as proposed, the Common Core's “college and career ready” performance level becomes the standard for high school graduation, it will push more kids out of high school than it will prepare for college.

This is not just cynical speculation. It is a reasonable projection based on the history of the NCLB decade, the dismantling of public education in the nation's urban centers, and the appalling growth of the inequality and concentrated poverty that remains the central problem in public education.

Nor are we exaggerating the potential for disaster. Consider this description from Charlotte Danielson, a highly regarded mainstream authority on teacher evaluation and a strong supporter of the Common Core:

I do worry somewhat about the assessments—I'm concerned that we may be headed for a train wreck there. The test items I've seen that have been released so far are extremely challenging. If I had to take a test that was entirely comprised of items like that, I'm not sure that I would pass it—and I've got a bunch of degrees. So I do worry that in some schools we'll have 80 percent or some large number of students failing. That's what I mean by train wreck.

Reports from the first wave of Common Core testing are already confirming these fears. This spring students, parents, and teachers in New York schools responded to administration of new Common Core tests developed by Pearson Inc. with a general outcry against their length, difficulty, and inappropriate content. Pearson included corporate logos and promotional material in reading passages. Students reported feeling overstressed and underprepared—meeting the tests with shock, anger, tears, and anxiety. Administrators requested guidelines for handling tests students had vomited on. Teachers and principals complained about the disruptive nature of the testing process and many parents encouraged their children to opt out.

Common Core has become part of the corporate reform project now stalking our schools. Unless we dismantle and defeat this larger effort, Common Core implementation will become another stage in the demise of public education. As schools struggle with these new mandates, we should defend our students, our schools, our communities, and ourselves by telling the truth about the Common Core. This means pushing back against implementation timelines and plans that set schools up to fail, resisting the stakes and priority attached to the tests, and exposing the truth about the commercial and political interests shaping and benefiting from this false panacea for the problems our schools face.

Rethinking Schools has always been skeptical of standards imposed from above. Too many standards projects have been efforts to move decisions about teaching and learning away from classrooms, educators, and school communities, only to put them in the hands of distant bureaucracies. Standards have often codified sanitized versions of history, politics, and culture that reinforce official myths while leaving out the voices, concerns, and realities of our students and communities. Whatever positive role standards might play in truly collaborative conversations about what our schools should teach and children should learn has been repeatedly undermined by bad process, suspect political agendas, and commercial interests.

Unfortunately there's been too little honest conversation and too little democracy in the development of the Common Core. We see consultants and corporate entrepreneurs where there should be parents and teachers, and more high-stakes testing where there should be none. Until that changes, it will be hard to distinguish the “next big thing” from the last one.