No One Asked Me But… (September 5, 2018)

By DR. LARRY MOSES

No one asked me but… There are two recent education issues of interest to me. One is the trans-gender policy of the Clark County School District (CCSD). The other is the fact that if the state retention law had been in effect in the 2016-17 school year, nearly 30 percent of Nevada third graders (10,883 students) would have been retained.

The trans-gender issue on the state level has been kicked down the road again by the State Legislative Commission. Due to pressure from irate parents, the issue that was scheduled for discussion and possible action last week was withdrawn from the agenda at their most recent meeting.

I am not going to defend or attack the myriad of issues involved. Those are issues for another day. Besides it really doesn’t matter what the state policy is as the CCSD has already established a policy over the objection of the majority of the parents in the district with their consistent 4-3 vote. Probably the most objectionable portions of the policy are the use of bathrooms, showers, and room accommodations on school trips.

The CCSD, which continually cries poverty, has projected a $678,431,990 Ending Fund Balance for the 2018-19 school year. The District can cure the restroom and shower issue by taking $100,000,000 or so of that Ending Fund Balance and retrofitting all school restrooms and showers into single occupancy facilities with a lock on the door. There would be no need to designate a restroom or shower as to gender. A school district in New Mexico has already taken this action. Will it cost money? Yes, it will.

The question might be what will be the cost of a lawsuit if a student is harmed, either trans-gender or other-wise, due to the District policy? But if the CCSD Board of Trustees are really committed to this cause, the money is there.

The issue of rooming on the road also has an easy solution. A little history of room arrangements on school trips might help. In the 1960’s and 70’s when we took students on the road we put at a minimum of four student to a room. This required students to share beds. The district, yielding to parental pressure, passed a policy requiring each child to have their own bed which required putting only two students in a room. Parents are now concerned about who that second student is. Simple solution is to pass a policy requiring single occupancy rooms. Will this cost more? Yes, it will. It does however solve the problem.

Now that we have solved that problem, it may be time to encourage the Board of Trustees to deal with a real educational issue like that fact that a large portion of Nevada third graders who are in danger of being retained for lack of reading skills are in the CCSD. While the latest data available from the state is two years old, there is little to indicate that the situation has improved much.

The State Board of Education has plans to minimize the effects of the failure of the schools to teach kids to read by the third grade. They can cut the number almost in half if they exclude students, with disabilities that make it impossible for the student to learn to read. This is fair enough. They can further cut the numbers by allowing students who have already been retained once to move on. One might suggest that if retention has not solved the problem for these students why would one think that it would solve the problem for others.

One must question the educational value for the other two categories of students who would not be retained. The first is the student who is an English Language Learner with less than two years of instruction in English. One might ask is this student, as he moves to the fourth grade, going to be successful since he cannot read English? The second is a student who can show that he/she are at grade-level when the reading failure is factored into his overall performance. Apparently, we are willing to allow a student to not read at grade level as long as his/her math score is high enough. This will be fine until word problems appear.

Now before you believe I am a proponent of retention, let me categorically state that I diametrically oppose retention at the elementary level of education. I am a proponent of teaching students, not failing them. Whatever it takes! No excuses!

One of my favorite stories in my educational career is a discussion I had with a 7th grade math teacher who failed over half of her 150 math students. When I asked how that could be? She stated that they came to her class not knowing how to do fractions.

I then asked, “Do they need fractions to learn what you have to teach them?”
She said “Yes, they do.”
I then stated, “Then teach them fractions.”
She stated, “That is not in the curriculum I was hired to teach.”
My reply was, “You were hired to teach the students, not to fail them. You should do what it takes to educate the student not merely fill curriculum requirements.”
Needless to say, we had little in the way of conversations after that exchange.

Now it is a fact of life that some youngsters do not learn as fast as others. Some students have abilities or a lack of abilities that others do not. Some students arrive at school with a cultural disadvantage. It is a proven fact that children who are read to at home on a regular basis prior to going to school learn to read faster than those who are not read to. One school district addressed this problem by asking parents of preschoolers to not to read to them because it puts other students at a disadvantage when they start school.

It may be time for schools to get back to the basics. Technology is great, fine arts are great, critical thinking will always be important; however, until elementary schools meet the basic needs of reading, writing, and math the other needs seem to be less important.

The history guidelines adopted by the State Department of Education emphasizes critical thinking while minimizing the need for factual data. However, critical thinking is of little value if it is not based in fact.

Thought of the week… A person who won’t read has no advantage over one who can’t read.
– Mark Twain