School performance: are we asking the right questions?

Much ink has been spilled on school performance, but are we asking the right questions?

Most of it is directed to de facto segregation.  That is, schools with mostly minority students perform worse than schools with mostly white students.  But is that right question?

I think a better question is what is the balance of performers vs. disruptors.

I have been in public schools with majority white and I’ve been in schools with a big mix of students.  In both kinds of schools I have found performers of all kinds of backgrounds and disruptors of all kinds of backgrounds.  The success of the schools depends more on how the students and staff encourage the performers and minimize the impact of the disrupters.

If you move the performers to “better schools” will you deprive some of the remaining students of the “protection” and role models of the performers?

Proof of poor education system

From my note pile:

We must have a poor education system.  Just look at the quality of the politicians and at the judgment of the voters who keep electing them again and again.

Education - maybe we haven't got the lead out yet

I wonder how many people have considered how a poor environment has caused poor school performance and how the ramifications continue.

Consider these two statements from "Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain" by David Eagleman.

"The major public health movement to remove lead-based paint grew out of an understanding that even low levels of lead can cause brain damage that makes children less intelligent and, in some cases, more impulsive and aggressive."

"As a child grows, neglect, physical abuse, and head injury can cause problems in mental development."

So, a child grows up impulsive and aggressive and becomes a parent.  The now parent may also neglect and abuse his or her children.  Now these children may have problems in mental development. And so it continues through the generations, some children breaking the cycle, too many not.  "The sins of the fathers are visited upon the sons, yea, unto the seventh generation."

"But," you say, "lead paint was used everywhere.  Wouldn't all kids have been affected?"  Well, many children had the good fortune to grow up in houses where the paint was well-maintained.  Others had the  bad fortune to grow up in houses in which the paint deteriorated, chipped, and flaked.  If the kids didn't eat some of the paint chips, they might have inhaled some of the dust from the deteriorating paint.

The problem is not to get the "lead" out of "poor-performing teachers" but to get the "lead" out of "poor performing families".  That will take a lot more effort than too many are willing to spend.  And I'm not talking about unwilling teachers.

What does a teacher make? Surprise answer!

If you're tired of the bashing of teachers, tired of the complaints of their performance, and tired of the charges of "greedy" teacher unions", you'll enjoy this bit of stand-up ire by Taylor Mali.

You can find his biography at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Mali.  His website is at http://www.taylormali.com/.

Magree's software laws

Magree's first law of software is that the complexity of software rises to meet or exceed the capacity of the fastest systems available to run it.  Don't believe me?  Try accessing almost any web page on a 24kb dialup:)

From this discussion and others I've come up with Magree's second law of software: the number of problems rises exponentially with the complexity of software.  It's kind of hard to believe if you consider the bad old days of mainframes having a good day without a crash.  But on the other hand, I've had more problems this year with software than the previous three years.

Do you see patterns or atoms?

Your thinking and learning is determined by your ability to see patterns. The more data you can put into a pattern, the quicker you can absorb new data, the more data you can put in memory, and the better you will be able to manipulate data.

Seeing patterns or "chunking" is one of the things that people who have superior performance in any field do according to Geoff Colvin in "Talent is Overrated". One of his examples is master chess players. Most of us look at the pieces on a board and try to sort everything out. A good chess player sees positions and calls on his or her memory of how similar positions have been played in the past.

Think of chunking in a more mundane field: your own reading. Do you look at each letter and tell yourself that it is a b because it has a vertical line and a curve to right and you know it's not a d, p, or q. Maybe you did that when you learned to read. But as you became more skilled you saw whole words and even started seeing whole phrases. Why do you think so many typos get missed? Editors look at big chunks and miss some detail that they glossed over.

Warning! Seeing bigger and bigger chunks takes lots of work. All your need is motivation and time. But you may be surprised at your gains beyond the material at hand.

Sing your heart out! To hell with having any talent!

Or dance, play an instrument, write, draw or paint, play a sport, but do not let anybody dissuade you because you "don't have any talent." You are not born with the diatonic scale in your head you are not born with the ability to write a complete sentence; you are not born with ability to draw with perspective; and you are not born with all the rules and strategy of any particular sport in your head.

I just proved this again to myself with a solo in church. I sang "Where have all the flowers gone?" and was amazed by the number of people who congratulated me after the service. I've done a couple of solos before at church but they were somewhat more tentative. I filled the room with my voice today!

I made a few mistakes in notes and timing, but the overall tone was resonant and spirited. If we look for perfection in performance, we will never do anything. A friend noticed that a violin soloist at the symphony made a few mistakes early in her performance. This soloist is a professor of music and the concert-mistress of the symphony!

Six years ago lot of people didn't want to sing near me. At one concert, the whole bass section shifted to the right as the others tried to get away from me. But with the express invitation of the church choir director and her encouragement, with the help of six years of voice lessons, and with the patience of my excellent singer wife, I've slowly improved.

I wonder if my voice teacher still thinks I would embarrass myself performing at an open mike night. I know I still have a long way to go on timing and consistent pitch.

For more of my thoughts on our ability to sing, see my article Why Don't Men Sing? and an earlier blog entry Why don't men sing?