Scoping Out the St. Louis Post-Dispatch

I was surfing the web today, and I came across the some good stories and features on the Post-Dispatch website.

First, I found out there was an education blog at their website called The Grade. The following is a description of their blog:

"An STLtoday.com blog on education in the St. Louis region, with a focus on efforts to improve student performance. Our team of reporters tackle a broad range of topics from school testing and charter schools, to discipline and bullying, while providing a forum discussion by parents, educators and readers."

Check out their most recent post on the Arne Duncan appointment.

Then it appears that the Missouri Supreme Court is letting the state keep control of the St. Louis Public School System.:

"The decision backs the appointment of a three-member governing board that has run Missouri’s largest school district since it lost accreditation in June 2007. Members of the elected school board have remained in office, but are mostly powerless."

Finally, the AP announced the 2008 All American Team in football. 1st Team picks consist of Jeremy Maclin (All Purpose Player) and Chase Cauffman (Tight End). We also have a third team player with Sean Witherspoon (Linebacker). GO TIGERS!!!

2008 Big 12 Championship Game

Well, Crap. So much for a preseason ranking of number 4. I am surprised we are even ranked in the Top 25 still. Oh well, we have the Alamo Bowl to look forward to. And as disappointed as Mizzou fans are, we would have been ecstatic to even be this far a couple of years ago.

Bad Week for Mizzou Football

First, we loose to our rivals Kansas in one hell of a football game. By the way, I had the pleasure of watching the game with my future in-laws this weekend. They are Kansas fans.

Then, we loose our outstanding Offensive Coordinator to Wyoming. Oh well, we at least have the Big 12 Championship game against Oklahoma to look forward to (where we are undoubtedly the underdog).

For Uber Cardinals Fans

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has created a Mount Rushmore of Cardinals Players. After a vote of who should be on it, they have narrowed it down to a 4 very good players: Stan Musial, Albert Pujols, Ozzie Smith, and Bob Gibson.

Some people think Pujols's selection is premature. I say nonsense. He has won 2 MVPs (so far), and has been arguably the baseball's best hitter for the past 8 years in the league (how long he has been playing). Oh yes, he can also field and run well for a 1st Basemen. You could substitute Lou Brock, Dizzy Dean, or even broadcaster Jack Buck for Pujols, and I would be ok with the list. But Pujols is still the better pick.

The Picture was created by Tom Borgman of the Post-Dispatch.

A Good Week for Missouri Sports

The Tigers won the Big 12 North after defeating Iowa State, and Albert Pujols becomes the second Cardinals in history to win 2 MVP Awards (despite the fact we finished 4th this year).

The picture of Pujols accepting the MVP award comes from St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Missouri's New Governor

The other result from the election that I have been excited about is Jay Nixon's victory. I originally supported him for two reasons: First, because he is a Democrat. As moderate as the Democrats are in Missouri, they are better than the alternative. Second, because he has served honorably as Attorney General for several years, and I am confident that will transfer over to his Governorship.

I have studied his education proposals from his campaign website, and there are only two things that stick out:

• He opposes Governor Blunt's decision to take money away from MOHELA, one of many decisions I did not like from Blunt.
• Nixon wants to build onto the A+ Program with the Missouri Promise.

I like the Missouri Promise proposal, but I wish he had more to offer in terms of education policy proposals. After all, what happens at the state level in education is just as important, if not more so, than what happens at the federal level.

Picture comes from Flickr via Jay Nixon's Campaign Website

New School Superintendent in St. Louis

Recently, St. Louis Public Schools hired Kelvin Adams as their new superintendent. He originally worked as Chief of Staff at the Recovery School District in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Will he be the next Joel Klein or Michelle Rhee? That is definitely possible.

"Adams said he would not rule out St. Louis following the lead of New York City and New Orleans by perhaps integrating a charter school into a building where traditional public education is taking place."

Consider the status of New Orleans Public Schools as of June 2008:

"Three in every 10 D.C. public school students are in charters, a much larger percentage than in most cities. The New Orleans charter school penetration rate is much greater: 53 percent of the post-Katrina enrollment of 33,200 students, according to school officials. Before the hurricane, charters had about 2 percent of the city's 67,000 public students."

Is it possible that he will be considered a failure and be replaced? Absolutely, since St. Louis has had eight different superintendents since 2003.

Is it possible that he will make St. Louis schools succeed and thrive? The odds are against him, but let's hope so.

Picture is from PubDef.net

The Issue of Teacher Training (and How it relates to me)

I realize that I am about a week and a half late in responding to this post, but I have to address this. Eduwonk recently posted a piece dealing with the subject of "traditional teacher training" vs. more alternative training methods. I have to say that I am a little confused by what the author of this post is trying to say:

"It’s not that [teacher] training doesn’t matter, but training on the job does seem to make a lot more sense than the traditional education school approach."

I guess I don't know how a lot of states do it, but is the author saying that traditional teaching programs don't bother with actual classroom time? Is it generally an either/or, meaning either go through a training program period, or skip training and go right into the classroom? Why not a combination of both? That is what I am currently doing (it is required in the state of Missouri). The past couple of years, I have been doing nothing but taking education classes, and in a couple of months, I am about to start working directly inside an actual classroom (student teaching/field experience).

Unless he is saying that "traditional teacher programs" do require classroom experience, but that isn't working either. If that is the case, than this really scares me:

"In general the evidence from methodologically solid studies is not encouraging in terms of the value of traditionally prepared teachers being more effective relative to those coming through other routes."

So, if what I am in is a "traditional" teacher training, am I essentially waisting my time? Is my program doing me very little good other than helping me get certification? I have to say that my training so far has given me a lot more confidence in my ability to enter a classroom and teach (certainly more confidence than before I started in my program).

I understand the current trend of looking for new and radical ways of doing things in education, and I am certainly not against that (we do need a major paradigm shift in education). But I also worry that more traditional methods might be labeled as obsolete, and thrown away. Certainly, traditional teaching programs (like, I suppose, the one I am in) still holds some merit and credibility. Perhaps I am just hoping that my current program is actually going to help me be a better teacher.

The Passing of Proposition A (Missouri)

One issue from this past election that I should probably address if the passage of Proposition A here in Missouri. For those of you who don't live in Missouri, Prop A was a ballot initiative that will:

• repeal the current individual maximum loss limit for gambling;
• prohibit any future loss limits;
• require identification to enter the gambling area only if necessary to establish that an individual is at least 21 years old;
• restrict the number of casinos to those already built or being built;
• increase the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21%;
• create a new specific education fund from gambling tax proceeds generated as a result of this measure called the "Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund";
• and require annual audits of this fund?

One might think that, since I am going into education that I would have automatically supported it. The truth of the matter was that I couldn't make up my mind. On the on hand, I am very excited that it may bring over $100 million to public school funding in Missouri. The schools will definitely need it, as they always do. But there were definitely problems that I could not overlook. For starters, the law will essentially set up a monopoly for existing casinos in the state of Missouri, and not allow other Casinos to be built on the Missouri River that might economically benefit different towns. In addition, the money raised for schools is expected to benefit more rural school districts instead of larger ones (i.e. Kansas City, St. Louis). While rural districts deserve more funding, the larger cities are just as deserving, if not more so. Let me be clear that whatever doubts I had about the proposition had nothing to do with loss-limits or the moral questions of gambling itself. I have no problem with taxing vice to benefit public schools, and if someone blows all of their money gambling, that is their own fault.

In the end, I left the Prop A part of my ballot blank because I believe that when someone truly cannot make up their mind about something in an election (as I couldn't here), their is no point in forcing yourself to take a side. I apologize to anyone who is offended by my indecisiveness. Now I kind of know what it is like to be one of those undecided voters you see on cable news panels that seem so damn clueless. I would like to think of myself as more informed than then though.

My Senator's odd choice of words

I have never been a fan of Republican Senator Kit Bond because of where he stands on the issues, though I have nothing against the guy personally. Today, he campaigned at a McCain-Palin rally in Cape Girardeau (Rush Limbaugh's hometown) with Sarah Palin, and said some things that were both reprehensible, and at the same time, very weird. First, there is this:

“Just this past week, we saw what Barack Obama said about judges. He said, ‘I’m tired of these judges who want to follow what the Founding Fathers said and the Constitution. I want judges who have a heart, have an empathy for the teenage mom, the minority, the gay, the disabled. We want them to show empathy. We want them to show compassion.’”

"The minority"? "The gay"? Does he not know how to pluralize nouns? Plus, when did Obama ever say he was tired of judges who follow the Founding Fathers and the Constitution? Then there is this:

“He thinks this country should be a government—not a government of laws, but a government of compassion and empathy, not of laws.”

Why can't our government be one of both laws, and compassion and empathy? Come on Senator!