The article notes that the GPA for participants increased by .026; a .026 increase would be for example from 2.0 to 2.026, or 2.5 to 2.526. It would be helpful to know if this is even a statistically significant change (or one that could have been due to chance). It's good to be encouraging, but does every program need to be portrayed as a success regardless of the results? It may be that the money could be better spent in other ways.
All of PPS programs are proclaimed, time after time, to be a success; yet, none of them have improved the educational results for the children that the programs were designed to help! Its just a fact! Until the content and delivery of education in PPS changes from a very low standard, one-size-fits-all model, all the programs in the world will not improve ACADEMIC achievement.
The article notes that the GPA for participants increased by .026; a .026 increase would be for example from 2.0 to 2.026, or 2.5 to 2.526. It would be helpful to know if this is even a statistically significant change (or one that could have been due to chance). It's good to be encouraging, but does every program need to be portrayed as a success regardless of the results? It may be that the money could be better spent in other ways.
ReplyDeleteAll of PPS programs are proclaimed, time after time, to be a success; yet, none of them have improved the educational results for the children that the programs were designed to help! Its just a fact! Until the content and delivery of education in PPS changes from a very low standard, one-size-fits-all model, all the programs in the world will not improve ACADEMIC achievement.
ReplyDeleteSports team coaches and band directors are mentors too.
ReplyDeleteGo figure.