>General H. Norman Schwarzkopf:Some of the best leadership lessons I learned as a young officer were from terrible officers. I mean, absolutely morally bankrupt Officers who had no redeeming qualities. People followed them out of sheer wonder for what they would do next. You learn far more from negative leadership than from positive leadership. Because you learn how not to do it. And therefore, you learn how to do it. Speech at the United States Military AcademyGeneral Schwarzkopf’s quote really fits this blog to a T! 2498 ISP’s this month so far – Why? Simply because some of the people who write on this blog have their own personal agenda (Including you PJ) and they are just like those morally bankrupt officers. And people follow this blog out of sheer wonder of what these self serving, egotistical people have to say! I must admit it is entertaining.
Your friendly Village Idiot
PJ,
I am amazed that you haven’t figured this out? It really isn’t that difficult to understand! Of the relativity few people that agree with you and your ideas only 6 or so showed up at last nights meeting. Apparently you don’t understand that even if you had a super majority, an elected official is charged with doing what is proper and correct for the entire community. I could try to give you a basic civics lesson, but I am sure it would be a waste of time.
Why didn’t we have 10 or more candidates running for the Board of Education? Where were the many critics (from this blog) of the Board of Education at the last Board Election? Nowhere to be found, that’s where!
You stated “So next time opposing candidates run against the status quo please give them some serious consideration and recognize that we shouldn’t have to have a fiasco like this every couple of years to galvanize our interest in our children’s future.”
What fiasco are you referring to? The fact that you and a small group of people who agree with you didn’t get your way? Sounds to me like your having a temper tantrum!
Your friendly Village Idiot
Anonymous asked me….
Idiot while you busy patting yourself on the back, have you noticed how many homes are for sale in town? ..Remember as the schools go so goes the town
Yes, I have noticed the 110 homes currently on the market….and I am hope to see more so there is continued drop in the prices of these homes (Thanks in part to the sub prime lenders) so I can buy low (now) and sell high (later – PJ I believe you should have some knowledge about this.) So please put your home up for sale….maybe I will be the buyer!
Your friendly Village Idiot
>Hi PJ,
re: TERC, can you summarize 1) those Ridgewood schools that have adopted it, and 2) those schools which are considering adopting it?
We have kids in Hawes, one of whom will be attending BF next year. I’m very concerned about the dumbing down of our math program.
Sincerely,
Concerned in Ridgewood
>To concerned in Ridgewood,
Travell and Orchard use Investigations in Number, Data and Space. Somerville and Ridge use Everyday Math. Both programs are the fuzzy math (constructivist methodology). BF has CMP2 which is the same fuzzy math in a middle school version. You have good cause to be concerned. Check out VORmath.com and read the petition on that site. It states the problems with this kind of math. Pass it along to any friends and neighbors that share in your concern.
>BOE Names Martin Brooks New Superintendent
At its May 14, 2007, meeting, the Ridgewood Board of Education appointed Dr. Martin Brooks, currently superintendent of schools in Plainview-Old Bethpage Central School District NY, as the new superintendent of schools, effective July 1, 2007.
https://www.ridgewood.k12.nj.us/index.cfm?sid=3&ArticleID=31872
>Right on, Fly! I just had to take a little hiatus from this blog because the high-pitched level of screeching and low-level sniping was just too much. It was starting to scare me…one could read this blog and feel that there was a huge opposition group. But it turns out that just like always, it’s just a FEW shrill, uninformed, selfish, rigid, nimby, egotistical sticks in the mud who like the sound of their own voices far too much.
This is not a fiasco. Will there be challenges, of course! Can we expect diametrically opposed viewpoints in a democratic society? You bet! But it’s not the end of the world, people. Find a way to do your part to IMPROVE what you want to improve. If you think ONLY yapping day and night on a blog is your contribution, sorry that does not cut it.
And please, for goodness’ sake, leave the personal attacks on board members, administrators, etc., out of the discussion!
>”And please, for goodness’ sake, leave the personal attacks on board members, administrators, etc., out of the discussion!” I have every right to be concerned about my children’s education. I have every right to express my concerns to the BOE and administration. Like thousands of people across the country, I feel the math program used at my children’s school is ineffective, incomplete, confusing, and sub-standard. If you were given the opportunity to learn about it, you’d probably feel the same way. I ask you…what is a parent to do when the powers that be choose to ignore you. Isn’t it the BOE’s job and responsibility to address the people that shared their concerns? I am going to guess you have no children going through the school district right now. As far as Brooks goes, his decision to be a long commuter from Long Island speaks for itself. Also take notice, his complete package has still not been shared with the taxpayers. I wonder why? One reason public servants keep things secret is beacuse they are afraid of the public’s reaction. THE BOE and ADMINISTRATION MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR DECISIONS AND ACTIONS!! That’s not an attack; it’s a fact!
>Remember the names Bombace and Brogan and make sure they are voted off next year. They only care about their agenda and do not care for the concerns of parents. They have done enough damage to the public school system.
And bbwool, look at you, yapping away like everybody in this blog. Listen to your shrillness once in a while.
>Parent speaks at BOE meeting about TERC
Parent discredits TERC publisher’s numbers and asks if ignoring the effect of outside tutoring is an act of defying science and objectivity.
>Hey, anonymous, 5:32. If you had read my posts, you would know that I am certainly NOT advocating that concerned parents should keep quiet. On the contrary. Yes, if you are unhappy with any aspect of your child’s education, of course you should speak up. ALL I said was that there was no need for PERSONAL attacks, where board members or administrators or teachers are described as evil, greedy, stupid or any number of other things I’ve seen on this blog. We are adults. We can disagree on things. But keep it civil. That’s all I was saying.
And, fyi, I have one RHS graduate in college, one in the HS now and one at BF. I am extremely happy with our experience in Ridgewood schools all these years. I have disagreed with principals and board members, I have spoken out on issues, I have disagreed publicly…that’s all part of the deal. I don’t expect to agree with every decision…
And, also, yes I have done a fair amount of research into the TERC program in particular and constructivist approach in general. I agree with some of it. I don’t agree with all of it. I don’t think there is a right way and wrong way that can be decided for all…rather, kids fall on a wide spectrum of learning styles…and therefore it is our job to recognize those alternative styles and use alternative methods. NOT ONLY the alternatives, but integrate many approaches in a way that serves the majority of kids and in a way that fluctuates as the needs of the district fluctuate. I wish people like you would stop trying to force the issues into black and white, for or against TERC, for or against Brooks…it’s just not the way the world works, haven’t you figured that out yet?
The TERC and other methods grew out of criticisms of traditional methods in the 70s and 80s. My bet is that if you had been a parent then you would have criticised the old methods and demanded new methods to give our kids a better education. I can say this because you obviously care about your kids and their schooling. That’s my point (one of them!)…let’s remember that we all share the same ultimate goals…giving our kids the best education possible. Disagreement and compromise are part of that process.
>The debate about math and Mr. Brooks are scattered throughout the blog. Is there anyway to consolidate and continue in an easier format?
>And, fyi, I have one RHS graduate in college, one in the HS now and one at BF. I am extremely happy with our experience in Ridgewood schools all these years.
Your kids have missed the controversial TERC program at the elementary level. They have missed the controversial CMP2 program at the middle school level.
The TERC and other methods grew out of criticisms of traditional methods in the 70s and 80s
The materials most controversial are the ones funded by the NSF. And yes, they were born out of a need for improvement but unfortunately since the 80s have not provided that improvement. One can argue they have made the math skills of our nation worse.
But upon looking in depth, the blanket cry that math was “rote memorization” is false. Many mathematicians have stated – if math was truly “rote memorization” as the reformists and constructivists wish you to believe, they would not have had the success in mathematics as they have had.
The other false statement is this new reform math is not “mile wide, inch deep”.
This actually applies quite accurately to the controversial reform curriculums.
And theThe Ridgewood Public School curriculums are exactly “mile wide and inch deep”.
For 180 school days, at the elementary 5th grade level there are 76 topics to be covered. That is a paltry average of 2.4 days of classroom time to teach the topic and for the children to digest it, practice it, and master it.
Compare that to non-fuzzy curriculum (California Math framework as one example, Massachuesetts as another). For 5th grade, there are 38 topics to be covered during that same 180 school days.
I think a child has a better chance of mastering math fundamentals and reasoning in the non-fuzzy approach; given on average almost an entire school week can be devoted to a single topic.
Disagreement and compromise is a part of the process.
But this appears to be an ideology from which its proponents will not compromise. It is why they move on to the 2nd edition without giving serious thought to comparing the existing edition to something that is not controversial and is not born out of that reform ideology.
To say in the same breadth that we are “balanced but still follow a problem centered approach” is not compromising. Those words are from our Asst Superintendent for Curriculum.
Its saying the words people want to hear (“balanced”) and adding the caveat that you will still be doing it your way (“problem centered approach”).
Take the time to view side by side student handbooks/textbooks. The TERC 2nd edition student handbooks are at the Ridgewood Library.
These are sold as a reference for your children.
When you compare the controversial TERC or EverydayMath to Singapore Math, you clearly see that TERC and Everyday Math are substandard and are not worth the monetary investment.
The pictures are worth a thousand words. As in, TERC 2nd Edition Grade 2 spends 13 pages showing you numbers (1,2,3,4,…129). After 13 pages of Singapore Math your child is doing, understanding, and reasoning with addition and place value.
Time for a change.
>Sorry bbwool, but this fundamentally is not a mathematical experiment. It’s far worse. It’s a sociological experiment.
Educators feel tremendous guilt over the achievement gap between the haves and the have nots (it has inescapble and uncomfortable (for them) racial overtones too).
Math is the key battleground of this disparity. Since educrats (not very smart themselves)cannot make underachievers smarter, they must close the gap some other way. They must make these over-achieving children from over-achieving parents a little less able and a little less confident. They don’t see any harm in “slowing them down” just a bit. That way, they can say that the gap is closing and they are being successful (that’s why the state test is so damn dumb, an idiot can pass it. The have nots need a diploma too).
Who wins at this game? Educrats get to keep their failing socialist system in place and beat back those who blame public school failure on the system that provides it.
Our board members are hopelessly enamored of the system since they sit temporarily at the top of it. It feeds their ego (why else tolerate a 5-hr meeting of educrats bragging?).
Our BOE has no concept, none, nada, not a wit, of the larger ideological and intellectual battle being waged. They will ultimately fail, but they will cause great harm in the process.
>I think you are far too cynical and sad and tunnel-visioned for me to take you seriously. Why is it always a conspiracy? Why can’t it ever be simply that some well-intentioned efforts aren’t successful? Why does that have to be part of some evil plan? Oh and nice try with the “racial” overtones…isn’t that a cheap shot, employed when one can’t offer and objective criticism? Pathetic.
>Why can’t it ever be simply that some well-intentioned efforts aren’t successful?
bbwool – you are exactly correct!
The school’s well intentioned efforts of TERC/Investigations and EverydayMath and CMP2 are not successful.
Let’s stop wasting taxpayer money and the children’s time and be bold and courageous.
Let’s follow the tiny #1 math country in the world, Singapore.
Let’s employ with a real pilot plan (hey, this would take no effort – we can use the published material from North MiddleSex Regional School District or we can even ask our neighbors in South River NJ). Have you read the pilot plan for TERC? (probably not, its not published anywhere!)
Let’s collect and publish the test scores per classroom, per grade, per school. Let’s publish the current levels of scores and numbers for tutoring, home schooling, afterschooling, enrollement in math centers. So that as Singapore Math takes hold we can measure those numbers and see them drop (sorry Kumon, sorry private tutors, sorry Huntington Learning Center — hurry for a better return on our tax investment!)
Let’s have Singapore Primary Mathematics in ALL of our elementary schools! I mean would you run your company with each division using yet a different system for accounting?
Imagine. Textbook for your child – that clearly shows them how things are to be done. And for you to reference, so you can help them clearly and consistently with their mathematics – instead of the subversion that occurs now. (TERC2 says to show a different way of adding if the child uses the standard algorithm)
Imagine. Workbooks with lots of problems. Practice makes perfect.
Imagine. ALL the children having a program that has been designed for slow learners, fast learners, middle learners. Yes, the Singapore Mathematics has provisions for slow learns. It is structured so fast learners can move on, and it reaches those in the middle. MATH FOR ALL.
Imagine just how good our test scores, our district could be for elementary school.
And then blow away the rest of the state when ALL (yes ALL) of our kids are taking Algebra I to start 8th grade.
And then imagine we give the middle schoolers the best, the #1 materials for their mathematics : Saxon Mathematics for Gr 6-8
And then we can call it a day.
>bbwool writes: “some well-intentioned efforts AREN’T successful”
So why not CHANGE IT? Granted that TERC and other reform math programs were probably well-intentioned but it’s NOT WORKING. So why stay with an UNPROVEN program? Why play with our children’s skills and potential? Why go with this program just to salve the ego and reputation of its initiators?
If long division, etc, and all those traditional math procedures (historical accidents as described by one TERC advocate) are that bad, our society will not be this far. We would not have gone to the moon, we would not have all these computers and precision engineering, architecture and exacting design will not be possible. No one is advocating that our teachers and students just parrot all these procedures…we want profound understanding and thought. But as one blogger wrote—TERC is at best a supplement, it is not substantial.
At the end of the day, I want my children to have as many tools in their toolbox as possible, and this is not going to happen if Math is censored by discovery learning advocates. Not teaching these historically sound procedures is tantamount to censorship.
I urge the BOE to listen to the mathematicians, to the engineers, to the scientists, to the inventors, who have knowledge of the tools needed. Listen to the concerns and do not hide in your pride and ego.
>bbwool –
the phrase “racial overtones” applies to the fact that the achievement gap is largely a racial gap between those many refer to as “minorities” and “non-minorities.”
As to an evil plan: There isn’t one. There is only a desire to survive irregardless of whether what you do is life-enhancing or repudiated. If socialism could actually produce a competent plan, things would have turned out differently for Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Idi Amin and all the others.
Public school has all the ills of a socialist system and most of the cheap thrills. The problem right now is that survival of the fittest requires more than just the cheap thrills. Intellectual dishonesty no longer protects those who know better from feeling, well, chagrined.
>bbwool,
About your condescending tone and claim “…it’s just not the way the world works…” Have you watched at least 30% of BOE meetings? Do you bother to attend at least 50% of your own children’s HSA meetings? If not then you, like most residents of Ridgewood, have little idea of how the BOE world works, and what motivates BOE members. And hey, what’s with the “cynical and sad…” comment? I thought you were against name-caling??
>Village Idiot, as for fiascos, does the phrase “Valley Hospital” mean anything to you? That was 2003. How about the Draconian cuts in services to students in 2004? Or the fiber fiasco of 2005? Or the bus driver fiasco of 2006? None of this ringing any bells with you??