The San Francisco Schools Endorse Mediocrity

The San Francisco Department of Partial Education has decided not to offer Algebra 1 for its students until high school.   Lizzy Hull Barnes, speaking for the SFUSD says that exposing all students to high-quality math instruction is a social issue.  [Damn, I thought it was good instruction!]  She goes on to say that SFUSD considers the practice of tracking students or separating them based on talent and ability is simply wrong.  [Does that also apply to allowing anyone to play on intramural teams?]  She then goes on to say that being good at math is no longer about answer-getting.  [Trust me, this is not the woman I want in charge of figuring interest rates at the bank!]

            Ms. Barnes has never taught anything but elementary level math and I doubt she has an advanced degree in pure mathematics.  In any event, her words speak to a total lack of understanding of good math, good instruction or good intent.  She then, predictably, goes on to blame all of this change on Common Core.  It is a good scapegoat. 

Let me make this very clear: a good teacher, supported by a responsible administration, could teach all of the common core standards within a socially neutral environment. They could teach all of these standards by making education more rigorous, not watering it down.  But that is not their intent. The Big Brother minions are trying very hard to socially engineer our children.  The problem with the CCC is that it gives those want our children to be goose-stepping marionettes, marching to the left’s drum, a tool that they did not have previously.

San Francisco is sabotaging the curriculum.  But that is not all.  They are also sabotaging the teaching.

You can’t teach what you don’t know.  These nation-wide statistics are depressing.

Your child has less than a 50/50 chance of getting a mathematics teacher who actually holds a degree in mathematics!  In truth, only 41% of eighth grade math teachers have a degree in subject they are required to teach.  The story in science is even worse where only about 27% of middle school or junior high science teachers have a degree in science. Frequently those degrees will only be in general science or the biological sciences.  Virtually none of the teachers will have degrees in physics. 

These schools may tell you that the teachers are “certified” to teach in math or science, or that they are “certified” to teach in the school (whatever that means!).  But being certified does not mean the same as having a degree. 

Algebra 1 is a gateway math course.  If you don’t get it by 8^th grade it becomes very difficult to complete the higher level courses needed for STEM degrees.  These, by the way, are degrees where women and minorities are in short supply.  But SFUSD doesn’t want competence, they want mediocrity.  The ignorant are so much easier to lead. 

Here is a quote from the second edition of my book Beating the Bell Curve (amazon.com) that every parent needs to know:

 Factors influencing the opportunity to learn are the presence of a curriculum, the presence of a teacher, and the presence of a student.  Given these factors, the next variable is the quality of each factor.  A high level of quality in one (let’s say teacher ability) can offset a low level of quality in another (for example, curriculum).  To get superlative results from the opportunity to learn put a high level of quality in each of the three components.  To get unsatisfactory results, put a low level of quality in each one.  To get negative results, leave one of the factors out completely.  It is these three factors: teacher, curriculum and student, who make up the opportunity to learn.  And it is the opportunity to learn that can influence, positively or negatively, your child’s placement on the bell curve of academic success.

Arm yourself with knowledge and keep the faith.