Deseret News | Reader comments: No Child Left Behind based on false goal

Reader comments
My view: No Child Left Behind based on false goal

BBK | 5:11 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I'm not too bright but can someone taught by this approach design an airplane that will fly or a bridge that won't collapse? Will they be able to understand that they, and all of us, will be better off when we are all personally responsible for ourselves? We've spend enough time, energy and money teaching kids to feel good, and entitled, without actually knowing anything. We don't need another round of the same result.

Utah Republican | 6:26 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Let's focus on spending, not reform and not performance.

Teacher | 7:34 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Excellent article.

Talk to ANY teacher and they will tell you that NCLB has ruined the good things they used to be able to do in a classroom. Now all we do is teach to the end of level test.

No exploration. No student guided inquiry. Just facts and memorization that the kids can find in two seconds on the internet. They are losing interest quick.

NCLB is spawning that disinterest.

Comments continue below

Instereo | 7:58 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

There's a third reason NCLB is a shame that wasn't mentioned and that is Education is a state responsibility not a Federal one. States have then given the responsibility to local school districts who then set their own standards and curriculum. Communities have always had schools to educate their children to become productive adults in their own community. A strong nation is built with strong communities. NCLB glosses over or ignores communities in an effort to build a national education system. I see that as a huge flaw in the law. We need strong local schools accountable to their own communities. These communities want as much or more for their children then anyone in Washington DC.

jeremykidd | 8:02 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I know the author must mean something different from the apparent meaning, because the apparent meaning is that we shouldn't set goals for our children actually learning the material. After all, what is important is that schools teach children how to be good people, and to function in socity. That can't be right. In the past, parents taught their children what it meant to be good people, and how they should act in society, and School was for giving children the skills they needed to do whatever they wanted in society and the world. Are educators now telling us that parents' job has passed to the schools? If so, who is going to teach our children math, science, and reading while the teachers are 'training' the children to play their role in society.

Like I said, the author must mean something other than that, but I don't know what. I'm not sure I want my child to be trained to fit in with society; I want them to break out and do extraordinary things that will transform society for the better.

That's what I want. I don't think that's what the author wants, and that's the problem.

Teacher | 8:14 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I'm a teacher. The Social Constructivist Pedagogy or "Learner Centered Teaching" suggested by Ms. Stoddard is an educational fad that is causing serious problems in education today. It is time parents do some research on the foundations of this philosophy, which is dumbing down our children.

Students learn best from good mentors who model correct principles and guide the child along the educational path.

Do we want to be operated on by a surgeon who has never graduated from a qualified medical school and never participated in a rigorous internship, or taken post-graduate seminars in the latest techniques?

Do we want our children to be taught math by a teacher who had little understanding of math?

Is spelling important to success? Do we want spelling tests and drills taken out of our schools?

Do we want our children to be taught math by teachers who understand pedagogy but not math? (Study the teaching curriculum at our colleges and universities.)

Can a child who graduates from High School who does not know how to read well, write well and calculate math be anything BUT a burden on society?

Who do we want Social Constructivist teachers and administrators setting our social standards.

Trish in Idaho | 8:21 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Wonderful! For the very reasons outlined here I chose to home school my children: they now learn at the pace best for them and their developmental stages, and succeed more quickly than they did in public school.
But the HUGE question is, how can such an approach to teaching be accomplished in a system that tries to reach the most amount of children for the least amount of money? Much smaller class sizes--no more than 10 kids per class--would be a great, if highly expensive, start.

Oak Norton | 8:39 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

There is an element of truth in what this author is saying about our education system and the need for character-based reform. However, the approach to make learning inquiry based, also known as constructivism, is a false theology espoused by churches (schools) of education that have created untold problems in our public education system. It has been common for younger teachers (initiates) to repeat various mantras such as ï¿½kids donï¿½t need to learn the times tables anymore because theyï¿½ll always have a calculator.ï¿½

The reason for the outcry against public education is precisely because those that call themselves educators have gone far astray from teaching the basic knowledge a young mind needs. They are trying to give children college level experiences (self-imposed inquiry) at elementary levels when their minds are wholly incapable of it.

Utahns deserve better. Standards in Utah for education should be as high as anywhere in the world. Without solid foundation work for our children, they will never learn higher order thinking skills necessary to compete in a global market.

Oak Norton

Frustrated Parent | 9:06 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Great points, I would hate my children to receive direct instruction in such things as addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc. I would much prefer my children simply to discover on their own the basics of education, as this will make them happier and more productive.

My issue with public education today is we are more interested in making people feel good then teaching people how to be productive. When my children don't get the correct answer they should know it and be shown (directly) how to fix it.

My issue with this is the fundamental flaw of comparing our school system with learning how to walk. Please..... There is a right and wrong in math, kids must be directly taught.

I truly appreicate those teachers that take into account what is best for the child in the future and teach them and hold them accountable. I don't want my children to learn math on their own, I want direct education. FYI - math may acutally require that.

Hangman | 9:09 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Lynn, This is pure garbage. Do you let all the children just discover what is right and let them flounder. NO. Direct Instruction is the only way to teach. Thes 7 'I's are stupid. You can't teach tools of inquiry unless they actually understand the fundamentals and basics of any field of study. Smart crooks are in jail because they are lazy and dishonest, not because they are any more clever than the rest of society - jails are also full of people who can't read and write and the only way to get what they want is through crime. Get a clue, this is such trash. It is the parent's responsibility to make sure their children become productive members of society. The schools are first and foremost to teach them to speak, compute, analyze, read, write, etc, anything after this is great but the primary position of teachers is to teach and direct instruction has been found to be far more effective than letting a student guess and flounder and figure it our for themselves.

Paul Mero | 9:23 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Amen, Lynn...nice job.

Jared | 9:56 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Government needs to get out of the business of 'do everything, be everything'.
I am a Utah Republican too, and I think throwing money at black holes is much much more than unwise. "The system" should not be saved. Children need education, not schooling.
Let the parents have their money and control. When should my vote have the right to force my opinions on your children or even you. I shouldn't have the power to force my opinion of how your children should be educated on you. That is wrong. But the government schools feel like they have the power and the right to do it to you and your children. They believe they know best. So much so that they use police power and government statute to enforce their beliefs on you. This is wrong.
Children need education...At the rate that their parents can decide and help arrange. An educated society is much better prepared to care for its own. But morals and values should be the parents call, not a government agency. Gov should do as the law dictates, not as some 'department of' dictates.
Freedom is always better.
America was built on it.
Choice, not force.

Experienced Parent | 9:58 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

This is very misguided. Not all children thrive in a 'just let them pick it up themselves' atmosphere. That only works well for bright children. My autistic son learns well in a traditional learning environment in our regular schools, but flounders dreadfully in this fuzzy type of learning. I pulled my children from our neighborhood school and put them in a charter school for precisely this problem. Our public school was using a fuzzy math system, and was concentrating more on teach political correctness than on teaching basic skills. They are getting a far superior education now and enjoy it more and we no longer have frustrated kids who can't figure out their homework.
I expect a school to teach my children the basics. That is best done with instruction, not by osmosis. Leave your agendas and your fuzzy instruction methods and your political idealogies at the door please and teach my children the reading, writing, science, and math skills they will need to know to be successful in life.

Phoenix | 10:15 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

My first comment has to be, thank goodness Lynn Stoddard is retired, that gives some peace me. My second comment is, doesn't it just make sense that Lynn is now an administrator? That's right, take the worst and put them higher up the ladder where they can do even more damage. Laughable article, like the following statment;

"Direct instruction is complicated by the fact that a few children start school already knowing how to read. They learned how to read the way everyone learns how to read ï¿½ they teach themselves ï¿½ the same way they learned how to talk and walk."

Everyone? Lynn I have what is probably sad news for you, my children did not learn to read by themselves, nor talk, nor walk, they entered school with knowledge aided "directly" from my wife and me, we were very direct in teaching them important things, and they are both 'A' students. I suppose we'll here from you in another article or "directly" from your mouth and you will also tell us how sad it is that parents are not more involved in their childrens education... right?? Cant' have it both ways Lynn.

Shellbelle | 10:31 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

How about this: parents who embrace Lynn's position should be able to send their children to a school which wholeheartedly embraces "Developmentally Apropriate Practice" and "constructivist" pedagogy. This would include virtually all the traditional public schools in Utah.

On the other hand, parents who believe the research demonstrating that explicit, direct instruction in all areas of the curriculum will result in increased achievement for their children should also be able to send there children to schools implementing these models. (This would include the most successful private schools and many charter schools in Utah.)

I strongly suspect, and reasearch certainly implies, that children from the latter group would emerge with much stronger academic skills than those from the former.

Allison | 10:53 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

The author is right. ï¿½No Child Left Behindï¿½ should be ï¿½No Adult Left Behind.ï¿½ I just went to parent teacher conference and dealt with many worn out, underpaid teachers, tired of dealing with students unprepared to learn, parents using school as glorified day care, students dealing with lives full of broken homes, no parental guidance, no restraints.

On the other hand, the author is wrong. As a parent, my job is to teach my child in my home the seven dimensions of human greatness: inquiry, interaction, imagination, initiative, intuition and integrity. For centuries, the family has been the most successful institution for developing a full range of human potential. I send my child to school to be taught the intricacies of biology, taught by an adult trained in biology. I send my child to school to be taught the English language, taught by an adult trained in the English language. I send my child to school to be taught pre-calculus, taught by an adult trained in precalculus. Direct instruction is absolutely the job of government public school. Or how about we set up two school systems and give parents a choice: Direct Instruction School or Solicited Indirect Instruction School.

It now becomes clear | 10:57 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

What is this person talking about? Run--don't walk--away from the public schools!! I send my kids to school for an education in reading, writing, and arithmetic. It is MY job to teach them how to become productive citizens--not the schools!
The comments from Hangman, Oak, and Jeremy all hit this right on the head.

Steve Whitehouse | 11:05 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Common sense has failed in univeristies that teach teachers. The educational institution in America as represented by this man is symbolized by Neville Chamberlain's response to Adolf Hitler at the beginning of World War II--a naive and foolish path that led to devastation. In the case of public education, the devastation of our nation's potential-- its youth.
We are at a crisis, but 80% of the parents don't yet realize it. We waste billions of dollars on failed educational philosophies. What we need most in public education is a total change in the administration of schools and the educational philosophy that guides our public school system.

michaelh | 11:18 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

This retired teacher is why we need reform in the first place. Her methodology allows her to artificially inflate student grades while simultaneously cutting her work load. After all if the student is busy ï¿½discoveringï¿½ there are far fewer papers to grade.
In my early years I was not educated in America. The work load of the Japanese student would crush a teacher as lazy as this lady. My daughter has had two teachers that have no knowledge of mathematics and physics. When I tried to help her by pointing out the glaring errors of the teachers examples it just frustrated her, she only wanted to get the approval of the ignorant teacher not master the curriculum. If we are going to require us to pay more the teachers must master the subject or not be allowed to teach it.

Room Mom | 11:44 a.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Folks, Lynn's piece is a clumsy expose on the educational philosophy of "constructivism" which has devastated American education, and especially Utah public education. Kids are doing excessive "self-discovery" which should be reserved for college level when they're ready for it, at the expense of being taught their core subjects.

Why did Utah schools recently score at rock-bottom when compared to states with similar demographics? Look to the root of the tree. It is the education programs at our universities which focus excessively on pedagogy techniques, without demanding teachers gain expertise in their specific subject. Our young teachers coming out of Utah's teaching universities like BYU and UVU are being indoctrinated in the virtues of self-directed learning versus direct instruction.

The idea that children can basically "teach themselves" is so far-fetched I actually thought Lynn was using sarcasm and hyperbole to make her point, until I realized she was simply spewing constructivist pedagogy philosophy. My children could read by the time they started kindergarten because I spent hours teaching them phonics.

State Senators John Valentine and Margaret Dayton are aware of the dangers of consructivism and I support their education reform efforts. Heaven help Utah's schools.

Jennifer Marple | 12:09 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Should medical schools have students "discover" the Salk vaccine and penicillin, or should they be taught how to use the body of knowledge that has been acquired? If I waited for my algebra students to discover/explore/intuit the solutions to equations, I would need the lifetimes of a cat. Direct Instruction is effective, efficient and is why I teach! I'm not a guide on the side, but I'm that sage on the stage. Teachers have the knowledge, expertise, and reasoning skills that we, in turn, impart to our students. The problems with discovery learning are that not everyone has the necessary skill sets and most often there is no discovery. I used to say that when I used a discovery style lesson, I brought maps, headlights, sherpas, so that no one got lost and we all discovered what we set out to find. I would bet the author is a proponent of whole language, another failed educational fad. I echo the sentiments of others who have responded, thank goodness she's retired. Look at our NAEP scores; I don't believe the countries that outscore us use discovery as a method of instruction. They teach!

Room Mom | 12:21 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Make that state Senators Howard Stephenson, John Valentine and Margaret Dayton and many other state legislators with a vision for correcting Utah's education problems.

CSharette | 1:07 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I am very heartened to read so many comments that display such clear understanding of constructivist vs. instructivist pedagogical philosophies and how constructivist philosophies have nearly destroyed our educational system and devastated the future potential of thousands of American children. I am SO glad to know there are many educated people and parents in Utah who understand this. So, let's change it!

Support the establishment of charter schools who demonstrate sound educational practice and pressure your local public school to convert to charter status so that you can see these practices put in place in your local schools. It only requires 2/3 of the parents to vote to convert to charter status. I'd be happy to help anyone who wants to pursue this.

Tad Wimmer | 1:41 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

This wide divergence of philosophical opinion on reform of public education is a sound argument for why all education reform fails unless we eliminate the monolithic bureaucratic structure we currently have. Stoddard's philosophy looks good in theory, and has some laboratory evidence to support it. But in order to work in the class room, it needs three things: teachers who understand, can teach, and support it; parents who understand and support it with children who are able to use it; and third, a tracable means of measuring its effectivness against a legitimate state objective that justifies its taxpayer cost. Applied universally, Stoddard's model fails all three.
Constructivism and NCLB both fail because there is no consensus on goals. In a market system where patrons can choose schools based on their philosophical preferences and personal needs, either model may achieve success, or one may prevail and the other die out. In the present system, neither can be successful because neither is immune to political influence.
If the quality of education is truly the desired outcome, then the solution must include an array of choice that permits patrons to determine and meet personal needs, and subsidies for legitmate governmental interest.

Mom | 1:56 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Are you kidding?!? It is not the school's job to produce a quality citizen by the time the child is an adult. THAT IS MY JOB!!! The school should give the child an academic education. The school should teach (yes, actually teach! as opposed to having my children wander around the classroom doing not much of anything and learning nothing!) academic materials in an honest environment. The molding of the child's character is my job. If public schools here in Utah would do their job and leave my job to me, they could send my child home to me a few hours earlier every day. In that time, I could better teach (yes, actually teach! Not just let my child wander aimlessly around our home or park in front of the TV for hours) the things that will produce a quality citizen.
Teachers should TEACH. It's in the name of the job. (Why does this need to be pointed out.) If they can't or won't teach, they should get out of the way so that those who can teach and will teach CAN.
I truly wish the schools would just do their job effectively and leave my job to me!

Richard Sherlock | 2:02 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I have taught college for 30 years and this article is nonsense. It is the very reason why so many students come to college dramatically unprepared. What we have are fads, nothing more such as students learning what they want to learn. The is the inmates running the prison. Or evaluating students in a "comprehensive " way so you can overlook the fact that they do not know grammer or times tables. If students do arts but don't know good grammer they will be reduced to one line in life " yah want fries wid that order" . I believe NCLB is absolutely right. Students should know the essentials for success and they should be tested rigorously on this. Furthermore if students don't improve year to year teachers should be held accountable in their paychecks or their jobs. Like President Busch I reject the soft bigotry that holds that some students don't need to be held to high standards.

Karl | 2:15 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

It sounds like all criminals were not taught to feel good about themselves. And everyone without a good education will grow up to be a criminal.

TE | 4:08 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

I believe that these fads come about because so many of our parents ARE NOT teaching their children to be good citizens. I am a teacher. My job would be so much easier if my students came to school prepared to learn: ate breakfast, are clean, had supplies and completed homework, are polite and respectful, etc. Reading scores would improve if parents read WITH their child(ren) at least 20 minutes a day. Children would be more apt to read if their PARENTS read for at least 20 minutes a day. Instead of beer and cigarettes, video games, and movies, buy your kid a book, or go to the zoo. Good heavens, many of my students have so little background knowledge of general life that I spend far too much classroom time explaining what should already be understood. Teachers ARE NOT miracle workers. Most students will only progress as far as they are expected by their parents. The educational level of the mother is a general indicator of the final educational level of the child. Education is three parts: teacher, student, parent/family. ALL must do their part to bring the child to his/her potential and become a contributing member of society.

Curtis Blanco | 4:35 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

To Utah Republican who said lets focus on spending not performance. Spending in education is about the best investment society can make. Why do you think we live so much better than 100+ years ago. The education community has proven that on their own, they will not always do the best job. As Citizens we need to hold their feet to the fire and ensure they teach Math correctly and reading etc. However teachers are professionals and need to be well paid. The job they do is to important not to have this field attract the very best. Utah Republican, if I interperet you correctly, you are penny wise and pound foolish.

Rick | 5:05 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

Hey Ms, Stoddard, Don't you know that the same pedagogy that you're touting is the same pedagogy of Investigations which was proven to be a total disaster in within the ASD? When my children come home from school my wife and I both look at what they've been taught in class and then we expound on it which may include drilling in the times tables, or reading or writing or what ever is needed. Proof in the pudding? A daughter a full 2 years ahead of her peers in math (she is a very young 5th grader), a son who scored extremely high on the ACT and has finished Calc BC as a Jr. Need I go on, or should I stop the drilling and start letting them languish while allowing them to Construct their own baseless knowledge systems?

Retired Teacher | 8:49 p.m. Dec. 6, 2007

"Students achieve more in reading, writing and math when they are taught as tools of inquiry than when they are taught as ends in and of themselves." This is actually true, most students go from kindergarten through college, and never have a clue about why school is important. They go from one day to another because they have to, or for a grade. What a waste. The curriculum should be integrated in such a way that reading, writing and 'rithmetic are taught and used in all other areas of the curriculum at the students' ability level. The three Rs should be used as tools which are continually maintained and sharped. A language teacher that doesn't integrate teaching math in the curriculum is as bad as the math teacher that doesn't integrate the teaching of reading and writing in the curriculum.

It is hard remember that the primary objective was to drain the swamp when you are up to your neck in alligators. Since by default, the schools and teachers have been left to teach the three Rs, personal behavior, the reason for school, and much more in the curriculum, we will find this to be an impossible task.

Rick | 9:02 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007

Ms. Stoddard, the more I think about your statement that children learn to walk and talk withou formal insrtuction the more I realize just how off base you really are. If you watch a parent with a very young child you will watch them holding the hands and lifting the child so so that the child's legs stretch and learn to lift and learn to put weight on their legs. You then see them holding the childs hands while taking steps.... Isn't this Formal Direct Instruction on how to learn to walk? Only after the child learns to lift, adjust for balance and the rest then the child can put it all together to walk. Not sooner. If a parent were to let a child learn to walk, like you say, then that parent would never help, or touch, that child and only watch and wait. If any parent were to do that then they could, and should, be charged with child neglect. Maybe that is what is happening when we allow our children to be abused in the way that you have stated. Thank God for all the parents, and others in society, that think otherwise.

Lisa Brodie | 9:48 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007

I send my children to school with the understanding that they will be taught and will learn. "Discovery" time is what they do in their free time at home when they read and play. School is for education, not for fuzzy learning.

I fear for our educational system when we have educators who believe this feel-good tripe. We will continue to lag behind all the other developed countries in the world.

Tad Wimmer | 10:15 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007

First we create a system where the "professionals" claim to know more about what a child needs than the child's parents, then we take away the parents ability to choose to use that system by draining the parents pockets with taxation and forcing their participation with truancy laws, and finally we claim (without a shred of proof) that a school based education will produce good citizens of high moral character. When the legislature provides a mechanism to reintroduce choice, the professionals imply that the parents don't have the knowledge to make these choices properly and that these choices are only for the rich, etc, and oppose the measures. Parents rail agianst "Constructivist" curricula and other institutional nonsense, but are not listened to, yet the teachers rail against the parents because they aren't involved enough. Its the structure of the system, folks.
I think I will continue to homeschool my children while I wait for this monstrosity to collapse of its own weight.

June | 2:43 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007

"Our young teachers coming out of Utah's teaching universities like BYU and UVU are being indoctrinated in the virtues of self-directed learning versus direct instruction."

As a student teacher, I am appalled at the anti-teacher mentality constantly disseminated by those around me. For the record, I have NOT been "indoctrinated" in any particular teaching style during my time at the U.

The basics are endlessly important, but if we are not teaching students higher-order thinking skills (analysis, synthesis, evaluation), we are doing them a great disservice.

People wonder why the numbers of teachers in the state of Utah are dwindling. Just take a look around these forums and you will find out.

Karen Herd | 4:17 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007

The author has not empiracle evidence to support her position. The first rule of debate is he/she that asserts must prove. Direct teaching methods have proven results. This author would have us believe our prisons are full of well education criminals simply lacking social skills. Statistics prove the exact opposite. Lack of basic reading, writing and math skills have a direct correlation to anti-social behavior. There are hundreds of studies that have cofirmed this. Additionally, crimianls who recieve education while incarcerated have dramatically lower recidivism rates. Having lived overseas I have observed the emphasis that Asian countries place on direct teaching methods. Their success rates a undeniable. As American moves away from these proven methods it will undermine its position as a world leader. As we grow older our learning capablilities change and it is rediculous to compare how an infant learns to walk to reading. My son would never be curious about what it is like to live in a clean room but does that mean I should let him learn how to clean when he is curious? For those who follow this line learn another one,"would you like fries with that?" you're going to need it.

Anonymous | 5:54 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007

So...if kids can teach themselves, what was Ms. Stoddard doing in the classroom for 30 years??

Anonymous | 6:12 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007

Apparently the cure for illiteracy was before our eyes all along! Those silly people who can't read should have had the sense to teach themselves.

Rick | 1:03 p.m. Dec. 8, 2007

From Anonymous 5:54 pm Dec 7 "So...if kids can teach themselves, what was Ms. Stoddard doing in the classroom for 30 years?? I do believe she was siphoning $$ from your pockets. The scam lives and just like many of our insurance companies, the educational system seems to be legalized extortion.

Resigned Teacher | 1:39 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007

I totally disagree with this article. Too bad the vouchers didn't pass. The way to truly test this is to allow parents to choose schools and then see which philosophy pays off educationally in the end. Freedom of choice is what we need.
My 20-year-old babysitter graduated last year from Orem High and when I encouraged her to read more about a certain health condition she faces, her response was, "You know I don't read."
I have been frightened for our country ever since that comment. This ignorance encouraged by contructivism will be the cause of our loss of freedom.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.