How about mastering the first set of Rs?
From the Steamer (12/10/09, p10) is this quote from Dr. DiMinico
There is no question that our students need to acquire knowledge from the traditional 3Rs—Reading, Writing and Arithmetic; but the traditional 3Rs alone will not guarantee success for the 21st century. Many current researchers in education and in business have suggested that a new set of 3Rs needs to be considered when readying students for their universities, their careers and for their lives in general. They are Rigor, Relevance and Respectful Relationships.
No, but it certainly would help if students could MASTER the traditional three Rs first before moving to a second set. I think that advice would certainly be truthful for this trio of young adults (would you consider them "well educated" and knowledgable?).
As far as our high school students are concerned, do these signify that they are ready to graduate to the "advanced 3Rs"?
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Fall 2007 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| Gilford High | Reading | 60% | 40% |
| Math | 24% | 75% | |
| Writing | 18% | 82% | |
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Fall 2007 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| State | Reading | 67% | 34% |
| Math | 28% | 73% | |
| Writing | 33% | 67% |
Just saying that Gilford Students are "less bad" is not a defense. And it didn't get any better this year either:
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Fall 2008 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| Gilford High | Reading | 80% | 20% |
| Math | 28% | 72% | |
| Writing | 41% | 59% | |
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Fall 2008 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| State | Reading | 72% | 28% |
| Math | 32% | 68% | |
| Writing | 39% | 61% |
Worse, year over year.
Shall we try Science, anyone?
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Spring 2008 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| Gilford High | Science | 27% | 73% |
| State | Science | 23% | 77% |
| Proficient | Proficient | ||
| Spring 2009 | Or Less | Or Better | |
| Gilford High | Science | 34% | 66% |
| State | Science | 24% | 76% |
Worse, year over year. Again.
My question is, why are these numbers NOT in the Steamer? These were obtained from the NH Department of Education (I'll post the full results later on, as I have in the past) - they are publicly available. Why are we paying more than the state average for less?
Reading, 'Riting, and 'Rithmatic - not looking good at all. Looking at those marks for Proficient or Better, when did we decide as a Town that 40% was acceptable? Or 34%?
Methinks that perhaps that master of the first set of Rs might be well in order before we get to the next set. Wouldn't that be Relevant to achievement and Respectful to the taxpayers?
