Talk:Education in the United States/Archive 2014

OECD PISA scores are an unmitigated disaster
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA-2012-results-US.pdf What to include here? EllenCT (talk) 03:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is a story appearing a few months earlier in USA Today emphasizing that adults are suffering too. A selection of their letters to the editor. And here is Education Week's response. I propose that we also include a summary of the class size ratio changes in public schools over the past century. EllenCT (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Military recruitment
What should the article say about e.g. http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=1445 ? I propose that we summarize it. EllenCT (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems like WP:SOAPBOX. Do we want old people to defend the nation? Germany tried and failed at the end of WWII. Don't know any nation that has been successful with that formula. Student7 (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * why not recruit young people by improving the esteem in which the forces are held by improving the merits of their missions, instead of forcing their local governments to make them see recruiters? EllenCT (talk) 03:14, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems WP:FRINGE and WP:SOAPBOX IMO. Advocacy group. Student7 (talk) 20:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That's the advocacy group for the branch of the military charged with improving public health. If you say they are to fringe, then what source would you use to describe that aspect of US public schools? EllenCT (talk) 00:31, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Clearly neither a fringe group nor a special interest advocacy group, it's a well-established professional organization of those working in the field of health, and thus-IMHO-very citeable indeed. HGilbert (talk) 04:46, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Middle school, usually and sometimes
Middle school provides one case of a general problem, perhaps the most severe case. This article shows a flow chart with age and grade scales in the margins. Its "middle school" covers grades 5 to 8; students enter after grade 4 and enter high school beginning grade 9. A subsequent chart shows middle school covering 5-8 or 6-8 with "junior high school" beginning grade 6 or 7. Meanwhile our article middle school says "Usually, Middle School starts in the seventh grade. Some of the middle schools start at the sixth grade." --says prominently, for that is a whole paragraph in section United States.

Do we --perhaps in some US and/or Education wikiproject or task force-- have numerical data about the official usages, counting either students or jurisdictions? Do we know which or even how many states have uniform school classification terminology or organization, rather than vary by district?

We should convey the size of such minorities (I feel sure in this case) as middle school beginning in grade 5 or grade 7. Minorities of some small size may be relegated to footnotes that use language such as "less than 10%".

The same holds for school-entering ages. Do we have numerical data about delaying first grade until after children's sixth birthdays (72 months)? Or routinely taking first grade students who are, say, 68 months old. Th

Prose and illustrations should mainly --or wholly, with footnotes for small minorities-- cover large-majority terminology and organization.

--P64 (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Good point. I am so sick of seeing ages and grades changing for middle school.
 * Ed Secy says 10-15. http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/new-consensus-middle-grades-reform. A little longer than I would have liked, but sticks to grade eight as the end year. Don't look for much else in speech, it doesn't cover what we want.
 * Last line of this thing contains grades, but I don't know how RS it is http://www.scholastic.com/parents/resources/article/parent-child/college-scholarships-middle-school
 * This one lists ages 11-14 for middle school which sounds more realistic to me.counter drug oriented: http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Controversies/20070111184521.html#.U3FIX3aPOM0
 * Confirms the grade 6-8 statement. Says 11-13: http://www.teachingdegree.org/types-of-teachers/middle-school/
 * I skipped some interesting looking pdf documents because I can't seem to read those efficiently any more.
 * Bottom line. Grade composition confirmed. No allowance for "minority" of schools starting in grade five. Age composition bracketed but hardly confirmed. Nothing on skew for younger or older students.
 * I agree we need to nail this down. We need good cites. Student7 (talk) 22:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Can someone take a look at the article for Middle School as well? Both of these pages say Middle School starts with Grade 6 and indicates that private schools also follow the same model. I grew up in Dallas in the 80s and 90s, graduated in 1999. I only went to public school for 1st grade, and private school up until I graduated. Most private schools around here have Middle School grades as 5-8. There needs to be a paragraph (in the United States section of the Middle School page) and on here that states many schools also have middle school starting with grade 5. The Middle School article seems to focus on public schools. Since I went to private school, I didn't really use the term "Junior High," though it could be used in reference to grades 7 and 8 or 7-9. I started attending my private school from 5th grade - that was Middle School (Grades 5-8). Our High School was called "Upper School" and referred to Grades 9-12. Junior Varsity was usually 9th and 10th graders, and Varsity was 11th and 12th - unless you were super athletic, then as a freshman or sophomore you could join the Varsity teams. I think we need to clarify the age ranges. They vary from school to school and city/state to city/state, but the way the two articles are worded make it seem as if Middle School always starts at Grade 6 - which is not true. CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Not quite a comprehensive answer. The first two junior high schools that came up on a Google search both go to eighth grade: 1, 2. I'm not going to bother to search further; obviously, the terms are very fluid. HGilbert (talk) 14:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Kind of proves the point, doesn't it? Two old school districts with the original buildings housing 9th grade, but no longer.
 * In my hometown, there is a building labeled "(Village) Academy." The original 19th century building was for students preparing (individually) for college exams. Tutors were available. There was no "class assignment." In the 20th century, this became the local high school, which outgrew the building and moved. The Elementary school stills calls itself "(Village) Academy!" So do the administrators collude on wrongful naming? Yes! Student7 (talk) 23:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note that without much trouble, I found correctly named Junior High school at the top of a search (has ninth grade): http://schools.nyc.gov/schoolportals/28/q157/default.htm. And a department of education (not sure which one) deliberately distinguishing between middle schools and junior high schools. http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/GettingReadyCollegeEarly/step2.html. If they are identical, why make the distinction? Student7 (talk) 19:05, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

The racial achievement gap and citing Richard Murray
"The racial achievement gap is complicated by issues of social class, institutional racism, and civil injustice, yet some multivariate analyses have shown that it exists independently of these factors both in the United States and world-wide." The second clause in this sentence is misleading and inappropriately-worded. The two authors' methods and interpretations of their own data are so controversial and widely-contested that I don't think it's suitable to claim that they actually show anything. Other studies provide alternative explanations to the racial achievement gap that perhaps don't directly rebuke but powerfully contradict Richard Murray and Richard Lynn, yet the paragraph on racial achievement differences presents only one source where an alternative theory can be found. In my opinion, this shows bias towards one group's theory. I only changed the wording in one sentence but will make a Wikipedia account and return to add more information. 99.137.52.41 (talk) 05:03, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


 * When material like this by recognized scholars is nonetheless controversial, as I agree it is here, the appropriate thing is to report accurately both on the original research and the controversy. To turn an "analysis" into a "claim" is to misrepresent their methods. But we can link to the controversy, on the page about their work. HGilbert (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


 * To say that they "have shown" something through analysis is to claim something, and that's exactly where the controversy lies. No one questions their analysis. The question is in their interpretation of it and whether it provides actual evidence for their conclusions. I'm not averse to having them included; I said the wording is misleading and inappropriate. 99.137.52.41 (talk) 14:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Somehow, the article must represent a statistical result as having a different objectivity than an opinion. I have tried an alternative wording, which may not be perfect. Can we find the middle ground? HGilbert (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm satisfied with the new wording. I'd like to come and add a few other theories, but I'm very busy and this is not at the top of my priorities. Thank you for being willing to strike a compromise. 99.137.52.41 (talk) 23:34, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I still feel that some reference to the statistical results should be made. It is misleading to call data collection and analysis a "claim". It would be helpful to have a third opinion. HGilbert (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2014 (UTC)