The second one is pretty darn important as context! If the incentive to excel on this test is lower, even if it's the same for high achievers, might easily move the mean and median.
There are 6-7 states that mandate all their high school students take the ACT. The article mentions Hawaii. It would be helpful to see the numbers just for those states.
Edit: Just checked a couple states that had 90%+ participation, and the decline seems to hold.
The article mentions one school -- Caltech -- that is not requiring ACT scores right now. Where are you getting a moratorium on admissions out of that? They're still admitting students.
The article says “Scores have been falling for six consecutive years, but the trend accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic.” So it’s not just because of Covid
Well, my uncle had a heart attack during the covid pandemic but couldn't get a bed in the ICU as it was full of covid patients. Was he a covid death? I'd say yes (he lived in an region of low vaccination).
Hospital saturation is lightly correlated with vaccination rates. In fact, it’s probably reverse correlated. Rural areas which have a high degree of social isolation due to low population density didn’t run out if capacity to the same extent hospitals in large urban areas did. I’m very, very sorry for your loss, but maybe you are holding on to anger that is misplaced. Population density (lack of social isolation) was what drive hospital saturation. I was in a very low vaccination rate area, and we never get to even quarter capacity in the local hospitals.
The jury is still out if their response was better, worse, or just different.
They had lower excess deaths from 2020-2022, which is good. But they also had significantly higher COVID deaths in vulnerable populations in 2020, mostly the elderly, which could have lead to the lower excess deaths in 2021-2022, because those elderly people were expected to die in those years anyway, leaving headroom for other excess deaths that wouldn't show up.
Economically and educationally they seemed to fare about the same as their neighboring nordic countries with stricter policies.
So right now it looks like they had about the same results as their neigbors, but sacrificed some of their elderly a few years earlier than they would have died anyway.
If there was some other major thing that came online in 2018, I think it would be easy to rationalize this chart as confirmatory evidence of that too, though I mostly agree.
maybe electronic classrooms --I don't think today's kids get many actual textbooks to consult and read. It's either MSFT or GOOG classroom content delivery solutions. It can't be helping.
Every school should have a library for the interested students! Otherwise I bristle a bit at being anti-computers in public school, especially in the coming age where LLMs can be doing a lot of the more rote 1:1 work of teaching.
This is coming from someone whose "Google classroom content" was chromebooks connected to our teacher's Drive; if there's some cursed Google Blackboard-competitor then maybe a return to physical books could be justified!
It's a combination of a lot of different factors. I've had multiple friends I've known for over a decade speak about how bad their teaching experience has become. COVID just further accelerated things.
* A lot of parents treat schools as daycare rather than a place to learn. They're more disengaged than ever when it comes to helping out their kid, for fairly guessable reasons.
* There's been a lot of political attacks on our schooling systems which results in discouraging or outright convincing teachers to leave. Teachers are retiring and we're not replacing them with similarly passionate teachers
* The usual pay issues
* School admins hide a lot of trouble boiling underneath the surface because they're afraid of lawsuits. One example is that more and more kids are bringing guns to school [1].
* Private schools are growing in popularity which pulls funding from public schools due to school voucer programs despite a lot of private schools not having the same level of oversight or level of teaching
As a result we're seeing literacy rates decline [2] and in general students are simply just not graduating as capable as they were before. We're failing the next generation and the fix requires radically improving and funding our public school systems.
In most schools, bringing a gun is one of the few offenses that will actually be punished with real severity. Prior to the Columbine High School massacre it was actually fairly common for rural high school students to bring rifles or shotguns to school so that they could go hunting on the way home. It was totally normal, and violence in those schools beyond minor fistfights was unknown. Many schools also had competitive shooting teams. But the change in attitudes, increased paranoia, and break down in social norms has made that situation untenable.
Most public school teachers are great people and do their best to educate every student. But a small minority of teachers, and a larger number of the administrators and union leaders whom they answer to, increasingly see schools as a channel to indoctrinate students on controversial social and political issues. It only takes one encounter with a situation like that to turn a parent off of public schooling entirely and move their child to a private school that better aligns with their values.
California has also banned suspending students for willful defiance. While those suspensions were over used in some schools, they did at least serve to get disruptive students out of the way so that others could learn. So, the situation here is likely to deteriorate further.
That bill let's teachers remove students from the classroom still. They just cant be suspended from school. It would be up to the schools to figure out an in-school punishment or improvement program.
My sister and brother in law are both teachers. Good ones. I make more than double their combined income, and their jobs sound way more stressful. The bil is actively working to switch careers because of it
It's crazy how little society values kids despite the constant drumbeat of "won't somebody pleaaasee think of the children" when it comes to safety or censorship.
It's important to vote for people locally and federally who support things like the child tax credit, free meals at school, maternity leave, etc. This is especially important since the repeal of Roe V Wade if you live in a place with forced birth.
Summer breaks for teachers are much shorter than for students, especially when you take into account required continuing education and professional development.
IME, government teachers have at most 2 weeks of required work days during the summers: one right after school ends, one right before school begins. Depending on the state/ district, that leaves 6-8 weeks of summer break.
They also get more than a month of vacation during the school year: 1 week in fall, 2 weeks in winter, 1 week in spring, plus state holidays.
Even with mandatory continuing education (which many jobs require), government teachers are still getting a few months of vacation. It's not comparable to folks who have to work 11+ months every year.
Only 2 weeks of vacation a year and no holidays? Any professional who is currently employed and not in dire need of a significant pay raise can afford to be more discriminating than to get such a raw deal.
So at least $85k combined, which is about $35k over the state median household. So you're making about $170k, which is still about double the national median household?
Is it the stress of the class room or the lack of pay? If all the kids behaved and the admins were great bosses would he be thinking about changing careers? I think there is more than money at play with school test scores.
The stories you hear coming from teachers are nuts. My parents basically deferred to the teacher's opinion in almost all matters at school. Meanwhile, enough modern parents go to war for their little monsters that I think teachers feel limited in how firmly they can give negative feedback.
>Education and learning is a skill that's transferred in a very large part from parents.
No it isn't. Being able to impregnate a woman or give birth does NOT magically make you a great teacher! My mother has an innate gift for teaching, and she STILL benefited from 4-6 years of college courses and continual training and improvement over the 30 years she taught and is still teaching.
Meanwhile, the entire time she has taught, parents have done everything they can to shift blame from bad home life and kids that don't value education to "you aren't doing enough" even as she literally buys her students winter coats, from her own pocketbook, as the school doesn't even buy her new markers for her whiteboard or new material so she can stop using 25 year old VHS tapes that are literally losing their contents from normal wear, even as she is one of the favorite teachers in the entire school system because of her immense empathy, even as "bad kids" do very well in her class because of how sincere she is, how much she cares, and how good she is at her job.
People say "We've increased so much what money we give to schools" completely ignoring that the money has NOT been distributed in any sort of even way, and even in my state which has largely good outcomes for education, the vast majority of the funding goes to a couple prestige schools in the south that were already rich because they are in rich towns, and the little money that trickles to the impoverished schools in the rest of the state largely goes to paying administrators led by superintendents that are just whoever the "Good old boys" were twenty years ago. Actual teacher pay has not kept up with inflation.
I'm so sick of all this teacher blaming bullshit around education. Actually trained teachers have been shouting about what they need to improve things for decades, and none of the managerial class has given them even a shred of what they actually need, while everyone continues to blame them, and have even claimed public education is just indoctrination. It's infuriating.
Education is a skill, a professional and knowledge based skill. Teachers aren't baby sitters, and if you decide you only need a high school degree to teach, don't be surprised when it goes poorly.
There is a massive difference between educating a single person who you have a very close relationship with and managing the education of ~100 students in batches of 20 to 30 which you know for a single year, given only a few hours a week with them.
Most any parent (or most any relative or family friend) without training is able to do the first form of education due to how much time they can spend and the existing relationship, but they will not be able to do the second. There is a limit on how much education they can give based on their own knowledge, but even without training they can still teach the basics they know and instill a desire to learn.
We can't scale this. We can't hire enough teachers to work with students 1 on 1 in the same way parents can. We have to have experts who work with groups of students to continue their education into more advance knowledge. But even these experts can't do the entire process of education, at least not with the class sizes they are currently being given.
>We can't scale this. We can't hire enough teachers to work with students 1 on 1
1 on 1 is not necessary. Even one on ten is probably not necessary. One on twenty for the average case is effective, while "trouble kids" get smaller class sizes. School boards never approve that though.
I am not OP but I don't think you are on the same page as the OP. I believe OP was trying to say was that parents heavily impact their children's ability to perform well in school. There are a ton of studies that show involvement from parents, parents level of educational attainment, the amount of resources that parents have access too etc. directly impact their children's educational outcomes.
I could be wrong but I don't think the OP was blaming teachers
I think OP would agree with your statement
"Meanwhile, the entire time she has taught, parents have done everything they can to shift blame from bad home life and kids that don't value education to "you aren't doing enough""
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2853053/https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=pare...
There's also a kind of giving up that's happened. You can't take kids seriously, no matter how bad they behave or how little they do they don't face any consequences. There's no getting kicked out or left back, some classes are just a social club and the teacher has no choice to stand by. I just had a relative leave after sticking it out in some really challenging schools for ten years.
People would really like it to be underfunding. Teachers are somewhat underpaid, but where I live they get a pretty good salary. The real issue is that teachers have no autonomy to teach, they spend their time filling out forms and checking boxes and they can be told what's what by administrators. They also have no tools for classroom control, even in situations where students are doing things that would be crimes if done by adults. It's impossible to perform well in those circumstances, and most self-respecting people wouldn't work under those conditions. And this is reflected in abysmal teacher retention.
Where I live, schools spend $38,000 per year per student. It's not underfunding that's the issue, it's some really bad ideas and a kind of willfully ignorant utopianism.
Baltimore City Schools received 29 federal Covid grants totaling $799M to fight learning loss. Yet, in 2023, just 9.1% of all 3rd-8th graders tested proficient in math. MEANING, taxpayers gave an additional $799M and 91% of Baltimore students are NOT math proficient.
New test scores, known as MCAP (Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program), obtained by Project Baltimore, revealed that 23 schools, including elementary, middle, and high schools, had not one student that could do math at grade level.
A Calverton educator, who reached out to Fox45, claims to have received that text. “[It instructed me to] go into my grade book, make sure no students are failing, and essentially change the grade if they are failing so they will pass with a 60 percent,” said the teacher, whose identity we are concealing upon request.
“I was frustrated as a teacher. We’re public servants. And when we see things like grade changing, that’s self-serving. That’s not helping the kids.”
After watching Fox45’s recent investigations into allegations of grade changing at Calverton, the City Schools employee contacted Project Baltimore to say a couple things. First, according to the teacher, grade changing at Calverton is “very common.”
Second, the educator told Fox45, changing grades is the easiest and fastest way to pass more students, which makes the school and its administrators look better. But, it does a huge disservice to not just the kids, but our entire community.
“Teaching a whole generation of kids that they don’t have to be accountable for their actions, or that hard work isn’t valued or valuable when they are in school, is so discouraging and damaging.”
Adding insult to injury, the same teacher said that he even passed kids who had been on his roster all year but didn’t bother to show up for a single day of class.
But this teacher says grade changing at Calverton goes much further than just taking a failing grade and making it a 60. Some students who pass, according to this educator, don’t even have grades because they’ve never showed up to class.
“There were students on my roster all year that I had never met, had never seen. On paper they passed my class and passed onto the next year.”
“I love my job and I love my students,” concluded the teacher. “I want to see the students at Calverton and other schools across the city, get a fresh start. And it’s going to be hard because the students are used to this now. But the students deserve better and our city deserve better.”
Things like this seem like a real issue that should be in the news daily.
Only 9% testing proficient is horrifying, and every teacher and administrator involved should be replaced. It's hard to compare teaching to a corporation, but whenever you have a metric that you only hit 9% on, you wouldn't wouldn't last long.
I anticipate a wide range of wacky theories to explain this, but the simplest one seems to be COVID—the disease, not the remote schooling. COVID is a disease that impairs neurological function. The majority of tested students have been infected with a disease that causes brain damage.
From what I've seen, significant loss of brain function is restricted to severe cases, which did not happen at scale in children. It's much more likely that ruining the school system for two years caused reduced educational outcomes.
The problem with that theory is there does not seem to have been any effect of shorter or longer remote schooling. Every school was closed for a few weeks, and about half of schools were closed for a year+, which sets up a perfect natural experiment. But there is not an observable link between longer remote schooling/closures and lower ACT scores.
That's why I say ruined the school system instead of specifying remote schooling/closures. I think the damage was holistic. Certainly it was at the post-secondary level. Standards were dropped, instructors quit, students stopped caring, and everyone was passed regardless. No one learned anything even when the campuses were open.
That article contains no actual evidence of COVID-19 brain damage in children. Have there been any large-scale controlled studies which actually show significant effects in terms of decreased academic performance or real damage on brain imaging studies (not just structural changes which may or may not indicate damage)? And I mean studies with proper controls which compared recovered subjects either with themselves prior to infection, or with matched cases who had never been infected. Individual case studies or observational studies don't tell us anything useful at the population level.
Lower scores ironically means the test is more effective for identifying skill, talent, especially for those who are above average. Easier tests means they cease being as useful for admissions.
there is also selection bias. happy teachers are less inclined to post . But I can imagine things have gotten worse. Entitled parents who think their special snowflake is a genius, rowdy students, politization of the curriculum, fighting, and a helplessness and powerlessness to do anything about it due to bureaucracy.
Kids don't read, parents don't parent, and teachers are underpaid and expected to do all the work that parents used to do at home to help raise and teach the kids.
Who could have imagined these results?
I witnessed this in my own household. My ex-gf had 2 kids by birth and 2 more that were adopted because her sister is an addict. Her idea of raising those kids through school was to wait until she saw bad grades from her eldest and then go to the school to blame the teacher. Mine was to actually sit with them and force them to do their assignments and study, which was especially helpful for the eldest adopted child, who was dyslexic. I grew up in a two parent, college graduate household. She grew up in a single parent household. Our differences in parenting style (we were living together for 7 years) had something to do with our breakup. I was demanding where it benefitted the kids and their future. She was demanding when it benefitted her (getting out of doing things around the house by making them do it).
Her eldest son is gifted and motivated and will probably do just fine. The others? Her eldest daughter is an excuse machine and the other one is just behind because of her dyslexia. Those kids have a ton of potential, they just need attention to reach it.
In 35 years, we've gone from kids having to do and show their own work to looking up answers online for everything and shortcutting their way through their educations because their parents aren't participating.
The reproduction here sounds like the movie Idiocracy. The one who is intelligent enough to teach kids properly doesn't have any biological kids themselves, but the poorly teaching ex and addict sister have 4 kids between themselves.
Many universities stopped looking at the ACT and SAT for various reasons. The article mentions this:
> Many universities have made standardized admissions tests optional amid criticism that they favor the wealthy and put low-income students at a disadvantage. Some including the University of California system do not consider ACT or SAT scores even if submitted.
Anecdotally, I've talked to a few parents of HS students who saw these headlines and believed that standardized testing was no longer relevant. I'm not sure how many universities do or do not consider the ACT, but I suspect the downplaying has reduced people's urgency to prepare for it.
Now for purely anecdote-based speculation: I've seen a strange social-media fueled malaise overtake the high school aged kids I've worked with. Teenagers are naturally going through ups and downs, but there's something weird about social media that lets them find content to fuel their cynicism and disdain for society.
I'm not talking about the likes of Instagram, but rather the teenagers doomscrolling Reddit or TikToks about how society is crumbling, the world is ending, and there's no point to trying because "the American Dream is dead". Weirdly, this mentality was rampant among the computer science students I talked to, who were seemingly unaware that they were on track to earn a decent living with one of the most comfortable careers around. Shaking them of this belief felt like an impossible task when they were just going to go back to their homes and doomscroll Reddit for hours every day. I have no doubt this doomerism is playing into a decreased motivation to study and prepare for anything among a large subset of students.
True, but young person logic can some times translate that into a belief that they're better off omitting ACT scores.
The non-standardized parts of the application process are becoming much easier to game, and parents/students are getting much better at it. I've even seen students set up "charitable foundations" or their own "startups" that were little more than shells set up by their parents with a quick website. "Looks good on an application!" was the refrain.
Universities are just gaming ranking. If you are DEI candidate and have low SAT/ACT, you are steered to not provide the score. That way if you are accepted average SAT score for university is not affected and university still rank high.
If you are white or Asian and do not submit SAT/ACT, your application goes to trash right away - there are enough candidates with stellar SAT/ACT to pick from. So SAT/ACT is still very relevant but only for part of population.
The drop in test scores is almost certainly due to the new curriculum in K through 12 grades which emphasizes group cooperation and a curated and limited view of history and de-emphasizes writing and critical thinking skills...
Also, The Establishment dislikes social media being used by young people because they like complete control of the flow of ideas into the brains of young people.. and the establishment wants to limit idea transmission to the educational curriculum and Hollywood entertainment, which they control completely.. they have tried to control social media but they cannot control it completely, so they're trying to shut it off for young people so that no unapproved ideas can get into their heads
CS students are probably now being told that AI is going to take their prospective job.
That is of course on top of climate change, war, housing prices, political insanity... all being front and center every day. Don't know how I would try to convince them otherwise either...
First of all, is a change from 19.8 to 19.5 really that significant?
Perhaps a noteworthy aspect to consider is the ratio of school-required test takers that might not be prepared vs prepared takers.
This is because the ACT is a test where the score varies greatly depending on preparation. (For example, I scored 27 on my first practice test, and after 5 more practice tests increased that to 34.)
So perhaps one possible explanation is that there were more school required unprepared test takers and fewer prepared test takers this year.
Thanks for the link to a graph, I suppose that is a pretty big drop relative to previous years. I wonder what the trend will be in the future.
I hope they don't make the ACT easier as compensation. I feel that the ACT is almost "too easy" already. For example, I would not consider myself academically talented (graduated mid tier public university with 3.5 GPA in electrical engineering), but I was able to get a 34 ACT after doing 6 practice tests. Also keep in mind that you can retake the ACT or SAT as many times as you desire. Thus, I feel like it looses its predictive qualities due to being so easy to score highly (if you prepare for it).
92 comments
[ 6.1 ms ] story [ 248 ms ] threadHard to measure both the drift in the test, and the drift in what the students learn. Maybe there is a mismatch.
There is also a moratorium on admissions at the moment and the ACT is not mandatory for the first time - which might skew results.
Edit0: This seems to not be the case for all states
Edit1: Some schools have a moratorium - I misread.
Edit: Just checked a couple states that had 90%+ participation, and the decline seems to hold.
Alabama 2017: 19.2
Alabama 2022: 18.0
Wisconsin 2017: 20.6
Wisconsin 2022: 19.4
Wyoming 2017: 20.2
Wyoming 2022: 19.2
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/11/act-test-scores-lowest-2023
Before Covid it was normal noise, it goes a bit up and down, it started to go outside the normal range when Covid started 2020.
They had lower excess deaths from 2020-2022, which is good. But they also had significantly higher COVID deaths in vulnerable populations in 2020, mostly the elderly, which could have lead to the lower excess deaths in 2021-2022, because those elderly people were expected to die in those years anyway, leaving headroom for other excess deaths that wouldn't show up.
Economically and educationally they seemed to fare about the same as their neighboring nordic countries with stricter policies.
So right now it looks like they had about the same results as their neigbors, but sacrificed some of their elderly a few years earlier than they would have died anyway.
This is coming from someone whose "Google classroom content" was chromebooks connected to our teacher's Drive; if there's some cursed Google Blackboard-competitor then maybe a return to physical books could be justified!
* A lot of parents treat schools as daycare rather than a place to learn. They're more disengaged than ever when it comes to helping out their kid, for fairly guessable reasons.
* There's been a lot of political attacks on our schooling systems which results in discouraging or outright convincing teachers to leave. Teachers are retiring and we're not replacing them with similarly passionate teachers
* The usual pay issues
* School admins hide a lot of trouble boiling underneath the surface because they're afraid of lawsuits. One example is that more and more kids are bringing guns to school [1].
* Private schools are growing in popularity which pulls funding from public schools due to school voucer programs despite a lot of private schools not having the same level of oversight or level of teaching
As a result we're seeing literacy rates decline [2] and in general students are simply just not graduating as capable as they were before. We're failing the next generation and the fix requires radically improving and funding our public school systems.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/10/10/guns-sch...
[2] https://www.npr.org/2023/06/22/1183653578/u-s-reading-and-ma...
Most public school teachers are great people and do their best to educate every student. But a small minority of teachers, and a larger number of the administrators and union leaders whom they answer to, increasingly see schools as a channel to indoctrinate students on controversial social and political issues. It only takes one encounter with a situation like that to turn a parent off of public schooling entirely and move their child to a private school that better aligns with their values.
California has also banned suspending students for willful defiance. While those suspensions were over used in some schools, they did at least serve to get disruptive students out of the way so that others could learn. So, the situation here is likely to deteriorate further.
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/california-law-wil...
He will never be able to match a teachers pension with 401k though...he might regret it when he is still working and his teacher friends have retired
With expected lifespan, a teacher pension can be worth over a million dollars...zero chance a 401k will deliver half that for most salaries
They also get more than a month of vacation during the school year: 1 week in fall, 2 weeks in winter, 1 week in spring, plus state holidays.
Even with mandatory continuing education (which many jobs require), government teachers are still getting a few months of vacation. It's not comparable to folks who have to work 11+ months every year.
Education and learning is a skill that's transferred in a very large part from parents.
No it isn't. Being able to impregnate a woman or give birth does NOT magically make you a great teacher! My mother has an innate gift for teaching, and she STILL benefited from 4-6 years of college courses and continual training and improvement over the 30 years she taught and is still teaching.
Meanwhile, the entire time she has taught, parents have done everything they can to shift blame from bad home life and kids that don't value education to "you aren't doing enough" even as she literally buys her students winter coats, from her own pocketbook, as the school doesn't even buy her new markers for her whiteboard or new material so she can stop using 25 year old VHS tapes that are literally losing their contents from normal wear, even as she is one of the favorite teachers in the entire school system because of her immense empathy, even as "bad kids" do very well in her class because of how sincere she is, how much she cares, and how good she is at her job.
People say "We've increased so much what money we give to schools" completely ignoring that the money has NOT been distributed in any sort of even way, and even in my state which has largely good outcomes for education, the vast majority of the funding goes to a couple prestige schools in the south that were already rich because they are in rich towns, and the little money that trickles to the impoverished schools in the rest of the state largely goes to paying administrators led by superintendents that are just whoever the "Good old boys" were twenty years ago. Actual teacher pay has not kept up with inflation.
I'm so sick of all this teacher blaming bullshit around education. Actually trained teachers have been shouting about what they need to improve things for decades, and none of the managerial class has given them even a shred of what they actually need, while everyone continues to blame them, and have even claimed public education is just indoctrination. It's infuriating.
Education is a skill, a professional and knowledge based skill. Teachers aren't baby sitters, and if you decide you only need a high school degree to teach, don't be surprised when it goes poorly.
Most any parent (or most any relative or family friend) without training is able to do the first form of education due to how much time they can spend and the existing relationship, but they will not be able to do the second. There is a limit on how much education they can give based on their own knowledge, but even without training they can still teach the basics they know and instill a desire to learn.
We can't scale this. We can't hire enough teachers to work with students 1 on 1 in the same way parents can. We have to have experts who work with groups of students to continue their education into more advance knowledge. But even these experts can't do the entire process of education, at least not with the class sizes they are currently being given.
1 on 1 is not necessary. Even one on ten is probably not necessary. One on twenty for the average case is effective, while "trouble kids" get smaller class sizes. School boards never approve that though.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_208.40.a...
People would really like it to be underfunding. Teachers are somewhat underpaid, but where I live they get a pretty good salary. The real issue is that teachers have no autonomy to teach, they spend their time filling out forms and checking boxes and they can be told what's what by administrators. They also have no tools for classroom control, even in situations where students are doing things that would be crimes if done by adults. It's impossible to perform well in those circumstances, and most self-respecting people wouldn't work under those conditions. And this is reflected in abysmal teacher retention.
Where I live, schools spend $38,000 per year per student. It's not underfunding that's the issue, it's some really bad ideas and a kind of willfully ignorant utopianism.
Baltimore City Schools received 29 federal Covid grants totaling $799M to fight learning loss. Yet, in 2023, just 9.1% of all 3rd-8th graders tested proficient in math. MEANING, taxpayers gave an additional $799M and 91% of Baltimore students are NOT math proficient.
New test scores, known as MCAP (Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program), obtained by Project Baltimore, revealed that 23 schools, including elementary, middle, and high schools, had not one student that could do math at grade level.
Calverton school (https://www.niche.com/k12/calverton-elementary-middle-school...)
Adding insult to injury, the same teacher said that he even passed kids who had been on his roster all year but didn’t bother to show up for a single day of class.But this teacher says grade changing at Calverton goes much further than just taking a failing grade and making it a 60. Some students who pass, according to this educator, don’t even have grades because they’ve never showed up to class.
Only 9% testing proficient is horrifying, and every teacher and administrator involved should be replaced. It's hard to compare teaching to a corporation, but whenever you have a metric that you only hit 9% on, you wouldn't wouldn't last long.
The lower test scores is doubtlessly multivariate. But one variable is indeed brain damage:
https://www.health.harvard.edu/mind-and-mood/does-covid-19-d...
(Don't get overly worried. If you're vaccinated, odds are high your brain won't be and hasn't been measurably damaged.)
Who could have imagined these results?
I witnessed this in my own household. My ex-gf had 2 kids by birth and 2 more that were adopted because her sister is an addict. Her idea of raising those kids through school was to wait until she saw bad grades from her eldest and then go to the school to blame the teacher. Mine was to actually sit with them and force them to do their assignments and study, which was especially helpful for the eldest adopted child, who was dyslexic. I grew up in a two parent, college graduate household. She grew up in a single parent household. Our differences in parenting style (we were living together for 7 years) had something to do with our breakup. I was demanding where it benefitted the kids and their future. She was demanding when it benefitted her (getting out of doing things around the house by making them do it).
Her eldest son is gifted and motivated and will probably do just fine. The others? Her eldest daughter is an excuse machine and the other one is just behind because of her dyslexia. Those kids have a ton of potential, they just need attention to reach it.
In 35 years, we've gone from kids having to do and show their own work to looking up answers online for everything and shortcutting their way through their educations because their parents aren't participating.
GP was asking for data and your provided anecdotes. It seems the issues in our education systems go back to when you were in them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid
Is minimal parental involvement a new thing?
> Many universities have made standardized admissions tests optional amid criticism that they favor the wealthy and put low-income students at a disadvantage. Some including the University of California system do not consider ACT or SAT scores even if submitted.
Anecdotally, I've talked to a few parents of HS students who saw these headlines and believed that standardized testing was no longer relevant. I'm not sure how many universities do or do not consider the ACT, but I suspect the downplaying has reduced people's urgency to prepare for it.
Now for purely anecdote-based speculation: I've seen a strange social-media fueled malaise overtake the high school aged kids I've worked with. Teenagers are naturally going through ups and downs, but there's something weird about social media that lets them find content to fuel their cynicism and disdain for society.
I'm not talking about the likes of Instagram, but rather the teenagers doomscrolling Reddit or TikToks about how society is crumbling, the world is ending, and there's no point to trying because "the American Dream is dead". Weirdly, this mentality was rampant among the computer science students I talked to, who were seemingly unaware that they were on track to earn a decent living with one of the most comfortable careers around. Shaking them of this belief felt like an impossible task when they were just going to go back to their homes and doomscroll Reddit for hours every day. I have no doubt this doomerism is playing into a decreased motivation to study and prepare for anything among a large subset of students.
The non-standardized parts of the application process are becoming much easier to game, and parents/students are getting much better at it. I've even seen students set up "charitable foundations" or their own "startups" that were little more than shells set up by their parents with a quick website. "Looks good on an application!" was the refrain.
If you are white or Asian and do not submit SAT/ACT, your application goes to trash right away - there are enough candidates with stellar SAT/ACT to pick from. So SAT/ACT is still very relevant but only for part of population.
Do you have literally any proof of this?
Also, The Establishment dislikes social media being used by young people because they like complete control of the flow of ideas into the brains of young people.. and the establishment wants to limit idea transmission to the educational curriculum and Hollywood entertainment, which they control completely.. they have tried to control social media but they cannot control it completely, so they're trying to shut it off for young people so that no unapproved ideas can get into their heads
That is of course on top of climate change, war, housing prices, political insanity... all being front and center every day. Don't know how I would try to convince them otherwise either...
Perhaps a noteworthy aspect to consider is the ratio of school-required test takers that might not be prepared vs prepared takers.
This is because the ACT is a test where the score varies greatly depending on preparation. (For example, I scored 27 on my first practice test, and after 5 more practice tests increased that to 34.)
So perhaps one possible explanation is that there were more school required unprepared test takers and fewer prepared test takers this year.
I hope they don't make the ACT easier as compensation. I feel that the ACT is almost "too easy" already. For example, I would not consider myself academically talented (graduated mid tier public university with 3.5 GPA in electrical engineering), but I was able to get a 34 ACT after doing 6 practice tests. Also keep in mind that you can retake the ACT or SAT as many times as you desire. Thus, I feel like it looses its predictive qualities due to being so easy to score highly (if you prepare for it).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/lose-vs-loose-usage