Total quality systems management comes to K-12 schools.

[fromderinside]

Here it comes. TQSM the final businessification of k-12 education.

Test Scores to Dirt Levels, Schools Amass Data on It All http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Data has become a dirty word in some education circles, seen as a proxy for an obsessive focus on tracking standardized test scores. But some school districts, taking a cue from the business world, are fully embracing metrics, recording and analyzing every scrap of information related to school operations. Their goal is to help improve everything from school bus routes and classroom cleanliness to reading comprehension and knowledge of algebraic equations.

Good for education?

The Deming way to education!

Really?

Your thoughts.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Here it comes. TQSM the final businessification of k-12 education.

Test Scores to Dirt Levels, Schools Amass Data on It All http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/u...lumn-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Data has become a dirty word in some education circles, seen as a proxy for an obsessive focus on tracking standardized test scores. But some school districts, taking a cue from the business world, are fully embracing metrics, recording and analyzing every scrap of information related to school operations. Their goal is to help improve everything from school bus routes and classroom cleanliness to reading comprehension and knowledge of algebraic equations.

Good for education?

The Deming way to education!

Really?

Your thoughts.

They want the teachers role reduced to that of a fast food work worker. The big bucks will go to publishers creating course materials(and tests).

 

[Nice Squirrel]

They want the teachers role reduced to that of a fast food work worker. The big bucks will go to publishers creating course materials(and tests).

AKA the more "deserving" people, corporations. Not those leechy teachers wanting living wages.

 

[fromderinside]

Here it comes. TQSM the final businessification of k-12 education.

Test Scores to Dirt Levels, Schools Amass Data on It All http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/u...lumn-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0



Good for education?

The Deming way to education!

Really?

Your thoughts.

They want the teachers role reduced to that of a fast food work worker. The big bucks will go to publishers creating course materials(and tests).

So improving bus routes and schedules, methods for teaching individual students, and finding ways to incentivise teachers is going to shift more money to the publishers? That seems so slow and out of system. Maybe you can illustrate how feedback about what and how books should be written and presented will improve the system in days and weeks and months rather than in years and decades. In other words put it in terms where ROI makes sense.

 

[Horatio Parker]

They want the teachers role reduced to that of a fast food work worker. The big bucks will go to publishers creating course materials(and tests).

So improving bus routes and schedules, methods for teaching individual students, and finding ways to incentivise teachers is going to shift more money to the publishers? That seems so slow and out of system. Maybe you can illustrate how feedback about what and how books should be written and presented will improve the system in days and weeks and months rather than in years and decades. In other words put it in terms where ROI makes sense.

This is opaque. What is "slow and out of system"?

Anyway, what's so bad about the system right now? If we're looking for things to improve, there are bigger problems around than the schools. I think the "education crisis" is a manufactured one.

 

[fromderinside]

So improving bus routes and schedules, methods for teaching individual students, and finding ways to incentivise teachers is going to shift more money to the publishers? That seems so slow and out of system. Maybe you can illustrate how feedback about what and how books should be written and presented will improve the system in days and weeks and months rather than in years and decades. In other words put it in terms where ROI makes sense.

This is opaque. What is "slow and out of system"?

Anyway, what's so bad about the system right now? If we're looking for things to improve, there are bigger problems around than the schools. I think the "education crisis" is a manufactured one.

I don't know. If you are one who is 'stuck' in Baltimore you would probably want an education system, any system, that potentiaslly opens doors for those who strive.

TQM works within systems. It is not designed to improve interactions between systems which requires other transaction and interface tools. But I digress. The point of data use is for it to be arithmetically improving quality of the system such as bus routes and schedules, student test relationships, and the like. Doing structural things like improving how external information sources are improved to better work with students at particular schools is not exactly how TQSM operates.

 

[Horatio Parker]

This is opaque. What is "slow and out of system"?

Anyway, what's so bad about the system right now? If we're looking for things to improve, there are bigger problems around than the schools. I think the "education crisis" is a manufactured one.

I don't know. If you are one who is 'stuck' in Baltimore you would probably want an education system, any system, that potentiaslly opens doors for those who strive.

TQM works within systems. It is not designed to improve interactions between systems which requires other transaction and interface tools. But I digress. The point of data use is for it to be arithmetically improving quality of the system such as bus routes and schedules, student test relationships, and the like. Doing structural things like improving how external information sources are improved to better work with students at particular schools is not exactly how TQSM operates.

Expressed in jargon that way, it sounds innocuous enough. How could technology ever harm anyone? And who wants inefficient bus routes?

Who is collecting this data and who owns it? Who is paying whom and who is making money? How transparent are these efforts? Aimee Guidera isn't even an educator.

I don't see any reason not to suspect this puff piece as another arrow to be shot at teachers.

Teachers have been saying for years that smaller class size will improve outcomes. But apparently that's a data point no one wants to hear.

 

[fromderinside]

Expressed in jargon that way, it sounds innocuous enough. How could technology ever harm anyone? And who wants inefficient bus routes?

Who is collecting this data and who owns it? Who is paying whom and who is making money? How transparent are these efforts? Aimee Guidera isn't even an educator.

I don't see any reason not to suspect this puff piece as another arrow to be shot at teachers.

Teachers have been saying for years that smaller class size will improve outcomes. But apparently that's a data point no one wants to hear.

Important issues all. Data serves them all if treated empirically. I've seen little evidence that within the american public school model that signals much about class size beyond that found for managed groups which is being applied to business. The idea that proper management should be limited to in the neighborhood of 8. Yet no school budget has been conceived or executed without a profit perspective and an auxiliary support mechanism that permits such.

As for class size the data is well known. Capacity of communities, even federal communities can't find ways to achieve funding and trained personnel necessary to implement such levels. Harvard, for instance, can make that claim for its students as can about two dozen other elite schools. Perhaps some Autism or special students paradigm is being implemented that way in public schools. However there, auxiliary modes of substantial funding exist complementing the paltry property tax based support found in most areas.

Where data will have real time payoff is in routines and methods at acceptable cost. It is obvious schools suffer from both bureaucratic freezing and other symptoms of long standing management systems. Here we can expect individual tinkering to provide benefits if supported by robust data and implementation metrics as found with say extraction of individual student best testing approaches. Continuous iterative measure, test, adapt, measure, test, and report systems should prove useful over generations. Fixed standards and notions sure won't.

I worry about control and use of data beyond specific targets. No sale, no distribution to other schools, no mining of addresses and preferences for monetary, political or social gain outside the specif are from whence it is gathered should be enforced.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Expressed in jargon that way, it sounds innocuous enough. How could technology ever harm anyone? And who wants inefficient bus routes?

Who is collecting this data and who owns it? Who is paying whom and who is making money? How transparent are these efforts? Aimee Guidera isn't even an educator.

I don't see any reason not to suspect this puff piece as another arrow to be shot at teachers.

Teachers have been saying for years that smaller class size will improve outcomes. But apparently that's a data point no one wants to hear.

Important issues all. Data serves them all if treated empirically. I've seen little evidence that within the american public school model that signals much about class size beyond that found for managed groups which is being applied to business. The idea that proper management should be limited to in the neighborhood of 8. Yet no school budget has been conceived or executed without a profit perspective and an auxiliary support mechanism that permits such.

As for class size the data is well known. Capacity of communities, even federal communities can't find ways to achieve funding and trained personnel necessary to implement such levels. Harvard, for instance, can make that claim for its students as can about two dozen other elite schools. Perhaps some Autism or special students paradigm is being implemented that way in public schools. However there, auxiliary modes of substantial funding exist complementing the paltry property tax based support found in most areas.

Where data will have real time payoff is in routines and methods at acceptable cost. It is obvious schools suffer from both bureaucratic freezing and other symptoms of long standing management systems. Here we can expect individual tinkering to provide benefits if supported by robust data and implementation metrics as found with say extraction of individual student best testing approaches. Continuous iterative measure, test, adapt, measure, test, and report systems should prove useful over generations. Fixed standards and notions sure won't.

I worry about control and use of data beyond specific targets. No sale, no distribution to other schools, no mining of addresses and preferences for monetary, political or social gain outside the specif are from whence it is gathered should be enforced.

"If". I have a feeling the pols will say, " thanks perfessor we'll take it from here".

My concern is secret, as in proprietary, data being used to justify policy decisions.

 

[fromderinside]

Important issues all. Data serves them all if treated empirically. I've seen little evidence that within the american public school model that signals much about class size beyond that found for managed groups which is being applied to business. The idea that proper management should be limited to in the neighborhood of 8. Yet no school budget has been conceived or executed without a profit perspective and an auxiliary support mechanism that permits such.

As for class size the data is well known. Capacity of communities, even federal communities can't find ways to achieve funding and trained personnel necessary to implement such levels. Harvard, for instance, can make that claim for its students as can about two dozen other elite schools. Perhaps some Autism or special students paradigm is being implemented that way in public schools. However there, auxiliary modes of substantial funding exist complementing the paltry property tax based support found in most areas.

Where data will have real time payoff is in routines and methods at acceptable cost. It is obvious schools suffer from both bureaucratic freezing and other symptoms of long standing management systems. Here we can expect individual tinkering to provide benefits if supported by robust data and implementation metrics as found with say extraction of individual student best testing approaches. Continuous iterative measure, test, adapt, measure, test, and report systems should prove useful over generations. Fixed standards and notions sure won't.

I worry about control and use of data beyond specific targets. No sale, no distribution to other schools, no mining of addresses and preferences for monetary, political or social gain outside the specif are from whence it is gathered should be enforced.

"If". I have a feeling the pols will say, " thanks perfessor we'll take it from here".

My concern is secret, as in proprietary, data being used to justify policy decisions.

The point of the story is that TQSM is an empirical quality assurance method. "If" it weren't it wouldn't be a story.

Shit. I knew I should have addressed that good transparency point you made.

 

[gmbteach]

Here is Queensland, teachers are being asked to collect data on their students on a weekly basis. Admittedly the data is different. Some weeks it's on reading or comprehension levels, spelling ability etc. We used to be able to do this on a weekly test, or on a term by term basis. Now, however, it seems that every week there is enough data required that takes teachers away from teaching for about a day a week, and which takes 5 - 8 times longer to mark, collate and enter into the system.

My question is this: When are we supposed to get down to the core business of teaching if we are always collecting data? When are we supposed to be planning our next weeks lessons if we are spending all of our off-class time marking and entering data?

There comes a time when push comes to shove and the powers that be need to realise that they should just let teachers get on with the business of teaching.

 

[Horatio Parker]

"If". I have a feeling the pols will say, " thanks perfessor we'll take it from here".

My concern is secret, as in proprietary, data being used to justify policy decisions.

The point of the story is that TQSM is an empirical quality assurance method. "If" it weren't it wouldn't be a story.

Shit. I knew I should have addressed that good transparency point you made.

If it's so amazing, let the politicians and administrators apply it to themselves and publish the data. Lead by example.

 

[fromderinside]

Now, however, it seems that every week there is enough data required that takes teachers away from teaching for about a day a week, and which takes 5 - 8 times longer to mark, collate and enter into the system.

My question is this: When are we supposed to get down to the core business of teaching if we are always collecting data? When are we supposed to be planning our next weeks lessons if we are spending all of our off-class time marking and entering data?

Proper collection and analysis of what and how it is being taught should return at least a day a week in improved learning by students studies in other process areas show. So take it as part of your teaching job. when you b egin to find that giving student a choice process of learning and another a do it approach and yet another a hearing approach versus a visual approach you'll be strongly rewarded. Sounds tough, but proper use of computers should make your task more of a guide and monitor rather than an information input and classroom control process.

If it's so amazing, let the politicians and administrators apply it to themselves and publish the data. Lead by example.

The approach is validated. Workers are happier and more productive with continuous process improvement methods integrated into their work wherever its been used. Horatio Parker you might be amazed that there are more than 300 school districts that are finding gains from these methods.

Kids aren't car or airplanes or software service centers or delivery system. But workers in every one of these industries are benefiting from TQSM. It may take ten or twenty years to get it right but it will ultimately revolutionized education results.

 

[Horatio Parker]

If it's so amazing, let the politicians and administrators apply it to themselves and publish the data. Lead by example.

The approach is validated. Workers are happier and more productive with continuous process improvement methods integrated into their work wherever its been used. Horatio Parker you might be amazed that there are more than 300 school districts that are finding gains from these methods.

Kids aren't car or airplanes or software service centers or delivery system. But workers in every one of these industries are benefiting from TQSM. It may take ten or twenty years to get it right but it will ultimately revolutionized education results.

My skepticism, admittedly speculative, is based on what I've read and heard over a long period of time from education professionals and the "reforms" that they're often subjected to. This looks, walks and quacks like that duck...more people in front of the class interacting with children is what I'd like to see.

But I'm even more skeptical that there's some educational magic bullet lurking in the data. Tweaks and insights possibly, but no revolution. My GW moment, reacting with my gut, maybe.

Surely you have testimonials from teachers, not administrators, politicians or IT pros?

 

[gmbteach]

Proper collection and analysis of what and how it is being taught should return at least a day a week in improved learning by students studies in other process areas show. So take it as part of your teaching job. when you b egin to find that giving student a choice process of learning and another a do it approach and yet another a hearing approach versus a visual approach you'll be strongly rewarded. Sounds tough, but proper use of computers should make your task more of a guide and monitor rather than an information input and classroom control process.

If it's so amazing, let the politicians and administrators apply it to themselves and publish the data. Lead by example.

The approach is validated. Workers are happier and more productive with continuous process improvement methods integrated into their work wherever its been used. Horatio Parker you might be amazed that there are more than 300 school districts that are finding gains from these methods.

Kids aren't car or airplanes or software service centers or delivery system. But workers in every one of these industries are benefiting from TQSM. It may take ten or twenty years to get it right but it will ultimately revolutionized education results.

My point, fromderinside, is that you cannot spend so much of your time assessing instead of planning. Planning the same lesson to cater for all the different learning styles takes time. For each hour you are teaching, you are already spending the same amount of time planning. That makes for a 50 hour week already. Add another 20 hours marking assessment and you have a 70 hour week. For which we, in Australia, get paid for 25.

Assessment is part of the job fromderinside, however, should it take up 1/5th of the time you have in front of the kids EVERY WEEK? What I am saying is that we have gone too crazy about data and not enough on the actual teaching of skills and concepts.

 

[ronburgundy]

“She sees where her scores fall on all these charts compared to all these other kids, and then she feels like she is behind or ahead or right in the middle, so she feels like she’s just average rather than excellent at what she does,” she said.

IOW, she wants her daughter to be deluded that she is "excellent" at things she is not. She is upset that her lies to her daughter won't be as effective if her daughter can see the actual facts.
This highlights how parents are among the biggest obstacles to their child's education. The mother cares more about whether her daughter thinks she understands something than whether she actually does understand it.

Guess what parents, your kid is merely average at most things, and it would be better for them and the rest us if your and they realized that.

In general, the push for more data is a good thing. Some data is meaningless and thus can mislead if put forth as though it does mean something. However, as this quote illustrates, their is rampant ideology among parents and teachers to hide and ignore real and meaningful numbers about which kids are learning and which methods help the most kids learn. Not to mention, exposure to numbers and stats about their learning of various topics will teach kids more about stats, and means, and variance, etc.. in the context of something they are familiar with and care about. Such knowledge is vital to their ability to understand the science (and social or political claims about scientific issues) they will be exposed to for the rest of their lives. Stats and Probability get little coverage in k-12, but should be emphasized moreso than algebra, geometry, trig, or calculus.

This potential benefit to statistical and thus scientific literacy alone is more than enough reason to collect and expose kids to these data about their own learning and other aspect of their education. They'd likely be interested in how the bus routes for their school can be evaluated with math to determine whether kids could have shorter bus rides and save money for things like band and art.

As with other topics, those decrying systematic measurement and empirical analysis are the real source of the problem and trying to hide that fact.