View Full Version : How to fix our public schools?
spursncowboys
11-30-2009, 04:52 PM
Does anyone have ideas? I don't mean the end-all solution but just something. A goal of 50 years where we are in the top ten of the world.
coyotes_geek
11-30-2009, 05:05 PM
We could just give the government more money and see if the problem magically works itself out. Although if that strategy hasn't worked over the several decades we've been trying it, I suppose we shouldn't hold our breath.
get more parents to give a damn.
coyotes_geek
11-30-2009, 05:12 PM
No diploma, no driver's license.
coyotes_geek
11-30-2009, 05:19 PM
This was an interesting idea I heard a while back from some expert on the radio. Separate classrooms for boys and girls. Theory being that it would help classroom discussion because boys don't want to look stupid in front of girls and girls don't want to look too smart in front of boys. Not sure how true that is, but I thought it was an interesting theory.
jack sommerset
11-30-2009, 05:21 PM
Get rid of all the illegal alliens, make every girl at a certain age (i say 13) get on birth control (boys if they can get a shot or a pill), cameras in every classroom, strict city curfews, nuns with rulers, principals with big ass paddles, armed police officer at every school and a bunch or different punishments lined up for the real dumbasses that don't fall in line.
clambake
11-30-2009, 05:28 PM
kill half of them.
the others will fall in line.
Get rid of all the illegal alliens, make every girl at a certain age (i say 13) get on birth control (boys if they can get a shot or a pill), cameras in every classroom, strict city curfews, nuns with rulers, principals with big ass paddles, armed police officer at every school and a bunch or different punishments lined up for the real dumbasses that don't fall in line.
and make sure they understand that facism is a good thing.
jack sommerset
11-30-2009, 05:50 PM
and make sure they understand that facism is a good thing.
Far from it. Instead of knocking peoples thoughts and putting them nice and neat into one little negative word, why don't you come up with some good ideas. "Get some parents to give a damn" is not cutting it, son. Alot of these parents that should be giving a damn quit school to raise the baby they just had. Eliminate the threat. Make it a law you can't have kids until, lets say 18. Unless you think its cool for 13,14,15,16,17 year olds to do so. Nothing wrong about going on birth control.
George Gervin's Afro
11-30-2009, 05:56 PM
Far from it. Instead of knocking peoples thoughts and putting them nice and neat into one little negative word, why don't you come up with some good ideas. "Get some parents to give a damn" is not cutting it, son. Alot of these parents that should be giving a damn quit school to raise the baby they just had. Eliminate the threat. Make it a law you can't have kids until, lets say 18. Unless you think its cool for 13,14,15,16,17 year olds to do so. Nothing wrong about going on birth control.
No jack the parent problem is the biggie. my spaouse has taught for over 15 yrs and #1 on her list is parents who don't give a damn. In fact more times than not, she has meetings with parents and they end uip denying their kid has a problem and call her a racist. One funny moment was when a hispanic man told her that he knew she didn't like mexicans... our son is half mexican... so getting more parents involved is a big part of it.. I can post a graph if you'd like?
EmptyMan
11-30-2009, 05:58 PM
Hold parents accountable.
Registration for reproduction.
Create more incentives for Asians and Indians to immigrate to the states.
panic giraffe
11-30-2009, 06:10 PM
Far from it. Instead of knocking peoples thoughts and putting them nice and neat into one little negative word, why don't you come up with some good ideas. "Get some parents to give a damn" is not cutting it, son. Alot of these parents that should be giving a damn quit school to raise the baby they just had. Eliminate the threat. Make it a law you can't have kids until, lets say 18. Unless you think its cool for 13,14,15,16,17 year olds to do so. Nothing wrong about going on birth control.
nothing is wrong with birth control, but that should be a personal choice.
for a person who has said that govt has their hands on way too much, i'm quite surprised that you would feel so strongly about mandatory birth control.
i think a nice mix of what you both propose is in order. coming from a really poor school district i've seen just exactly how a parents involvement can change the outcome of student productivity. so hold them responsible. make parent teacher conferences mandatory by law, fines issued to the parents if they don't show up.
if you truly feel that student pregnancy is the issue, then make sex ed available in schools. offer free birth control to students.
but our biggest problems aren't there. we just don't have the same standards as other parts of the world. hell, mexico's secondary education is at a higher standard (when families can afford to not have the kids work) than our freggin community colleges. we need to abolish standardized testing, because even the nice districts now, still teach to the tests. we need smaller schools instead of these mega schools out their where students fall through the cracks. we need to end summer being off time. honestly the list is too big, think 50 year plan.
DarrinS
11-30-2009, 06:29 PM
It's quite simple. We just need to tax the shit out of home owners and give more money to the teachers union.
Duh!
sabar
11-30-2009, 06:31 PM
Far from it. Instead of knocking peoples thoughts and putting them nice and neat into one little negative word, why don't you come up with some good ideas. "Get some parents to give a damn" is not cutting it, son. Alot of these parents that should be giving a damn quit school to raise the baby they just had. Eliminate the threat. Make it a law you can't have kids until, lets say 18. Unless you think its cool for 13,14,15,16,17 year olds to do so. Nothing wrong about going on birth control.
Some of the biggest dumbasses I knew growing up couldn't hook up with a girl and churn out kids if they wanted to. The problem is in the parents and our useless society. You don't see this problem in Japan because you are a failure if you suck at school, whereas you are cool if you suck at academics in the states. Sometime around high school these stupid kids realize they are about to get nowhere in life and its too late to turn it around.
Our society encourages failure and consumerism. Even poor underdeveloped countries have better treatment towards education in society. There's a reason so many foreigners go to top institutions here. They crave the education that we provide and do not consume.
baseline bum
11-30-2009, 06:53 PM
There should be way more vocational training at high schools. No, getting course credit for leaving at 2:00 and going to work at Subway doesn't count (it's sickening that my high school had a class filled with people who did precisely this for course credit). Teach kids to be plumbers, electricians, mechanics, cooks, carpenters, how to work sheet metal, etc. Instead of turning out graduates who don't know shit, give them a skill so they're not forced to just be replaceable cogs in a machine (what any unskilled worker is).
It's sickening that our educational system is constructed with the intent that everyone should go to college. It waters down college-prep courses to the point that they always teach to the lowest student in the class (save the AP classes, which are challenging in my experience). Only people intending to go to college should be doing college-prep. College-prep courses should be tough, and unforgiving, just like college is, or at least should be (fuck coddling and propping kids' self-esteem). High-school college-prep is WAY too easy, which is why you have tons of people who get the shock of their lives in college first semester of freshman year. Maybe if college-prep was more indicative of college work, you wouldn't see so many people wasting their money and driving up the prices of everyone else's educations for something they're not ready for and not really interested in.
Scrap standardized testing. I hate that schools teach a test that aims low instead of teaching a subject, but it's always going to happen that way when funding is tied to performance on one exam.
iggypop123
11-30-2009, 08:00 PM
has anyone ever wondered why the top schools dont offer teachers credentials? wouldnt you want a harvard or other excellent school to have teachers for your kids? that could be one solution just have the best teach the kids and another $$$, classes shouldnt have more than 25 students anymore destroys any shot to learn
baseline bum
11-30-2009, 08:05 PM
has anyone ever wondered why the top schools dont offer teachers credentials? wouldnt you want a harvard or other excellent school to have teachers for your kids? that could be one solution just have the best teach the kids and another $$$, classes shouldnt have more than 25 students anymore destroys any shot to learn
Teaching is boring. I don't think it matters how much you offered; you're never going to get people who would normally go into research or business on their own teaching at the secondary level.
jacobdrj
11-30-2009, 08:25 PM
The schools would do better if they were not mandatory. May not be the best thing for the nation, but, ya know, the schools would do a lot better...
You can't make parents care.
jack sommerset
11-30-2009, 09:46 PM
Alot of people give teachers way too much credit! Guess what, there are some bad fucking teachers out there. In fact, there are ALOT of bad teachers out there. I would say there are more bad teachers than good teachers.
But they get sooooooo much credit because they are teaching kids. "Yea for us" It's all bullshit. The title should come with responsibility. You pay someone to teach, they should be fucking good at it. All you hear is how bad kids are nowadays, how shitty the pay is, how the parents don't care, you know all the same bullshit they have been saying for all of mankind. You know all the same bullshit they have been saying before these teachers became TEACHERS. This saying, teachers are overrated talk generally comes down to most idiots out there, a chicken or egg discussion. Truth is, you either are good at teaching or not. Most people are not.
Of course parents can be to blame. The school can be the blame. The kid could be the blame. Laws could be the blame. Illegal Alliens could be to blame. Look at SA, 2nd dumbest city in the USA. Hmmm, I wonder why. Teachers get a free walk on this subject and they shouldn't! Everyone has bad teacher stories.
jack sommerset
11-30-2009, 10:14 PM
son you don't speak english, do you?
No. I am fluent in Japanese though.
Funya chin baka ka! Kutabare kusateru oyaji.
baseline bum
11-30-2009, 11:50 PM
Then adopt the toughest curriculum that exist in the world. This would be a simple start in the right direction.
If the US wants to be serious as a technological leader into the future, they need to follow India's example. About 60 years ago the Indian parliament created an extremely competitive system of engineering schools called IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) with the hopes that it would drag their nation out of poverty. It hasn't worked exactly as intended, since the greatest minds from IIT usually come to the US and therefore contribute to our economy instead (for example, the person who founded Sun Microsystems). Still, India creates some of the greatest engineers in the world thanks to this system.
In 60 short years the IIT system has gone from nothing to being a system of schools better than MIT, Caltech, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale. Anyone who doubts how good these schools are needs only to check the IIT youtube channel (where they broadcast a lot of their courses) to understand how amazing the education the IITs offer is. The schools cost next to nothing to attend for the few smart enough to ever get in.
These schools have created a culture where a lot of kids bust their asses like crazy in the hopes they can pass the entrance exam. You should see these peoples' work ethics. Even though almost none of these top students will qualify, they put themselves in an incredible position to succeed at other engineering schools in the nation. I could only imagine if America had this kind of dedication to math, physics, computer science, electrical engineering, and so on. It's too bad we could never have IIT equivalents in America; people would scream bloody-hell in the streets about socialism. In America everything has to be about direct profit right now. The country doesn't give a shit about its future.
Nbadan
12-01-2009, 01:37 AM
The legislature keeps passing these crazy laws that makes teaching tougher to get into, so the people who are qualified must be paid accordingly...simple supply and demand....
...would not be any different if we blew up the school system and went to private schools....not that this would ever happen because no private school is gonna take the kids of most of the wing-nuts who post on this board...
DrHouse
12-01-2009, 03:07 AM
The majority of Americans still believe the earth is only 4,000 years old and evolution isn't real. If we are going to change our education system, it has to start with a philosophy shift away from religious zealotry and towards science and technology.
This is where I had hoped Obama would really make a dent.
jacobdrj
12-01-2009, 04:02 AM
Are you calling Obama the anti-christ DrHouse?
And nobody says the Earth is only 4000 years old. They say it is 5769 years old, give or take a few months...
coyotes_geek
12-01-2009, 08:27 AM
There should be way more vocational training at high schools. No, getting course credit for leaving at 2:00 and going to work at Subway doesn't count (it's sickening that my high school had a class filled with people who did precisely this for course credit). Teach kids to be plumbers, electricians, mechanics, cooks, carpenters, how to work sheet metal, etc. Instead of turning out graduates who don't know shit, give them a skill so they're not forced to just be replaceable cogs in a machine (what any unskilled worker is).
It's sickening that our educational system is constructed with the intent that everyone should go to college. It waters down college-prep courses to the point that they always teach to the lowest student in the class (save the AP classes, which are challenging in my experience). Only people intending to go to college should be doing college-prep. College-prep courses should be tough, and unforgiving, just like college is, or at least should be (fuck coddling and propping kids' self-esteem). High-school college-prep is WAY too easy, which is why you have tons of people who get the shock of their lives in college first semester of freshman year. Maybe if college-prep was more indicative of college work, you wouldn't see so many people wasting their money and driving up the prices of everyone else's educations for something they're not ready for and not really interested in.
Scrap standardized testing. I hate that schools teach a test that aims low instead of teaching a subject, but it's always going to happen that way when funding is tied to performance on one exam.
:tu
Great stuff.
Far from it. Instead of knocking peoples thoughts and putting them nice and neat into one little negative word, why don't you come up with some good ideas. "Get some parents to give a damn" is not cutting it, son. Alot of these parents that should be giving a damn quit school to raise the baby they just had. Eliminate the threat. Make it a law you can't have kids until, lets say 18. Unless you think its cool for 13,14,15,16,17 year olds to do so. Nothing wrong about going on birth control.
mandating birth control is not in any way, shape or form an idea on how to fix our public school system.
quite frankly, it is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard.
jack sommerset
12-01-2009, 10:30 AM
mandating birth control is not in any way, shape or form an idea on how to fix our public school system.
quite frankly, it is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard.
Way to come up with some good ideas.:toast
Yes it would. I read a few weeks back, I think in here, where one school had over 800 girls pregos, One freaken school. When I have time I will get some stats for you on how many of these girls and boys drop out and/or don't got to college.
Way to come up with some good ideas.:toast
let's not waste each others time here. you have no interest in this matter. your only interest is in posting irrelevent hyperbole with the sole intent of stirring the pot. nonsenical crap like creating a system of forced birth control is not relevant to the subject at hand.
jack sommerset
12-01-2009, 10:49 AM
let's not waste each others time here. you have no interest in this matter. your only interest is in posting irrelevent hyperbole with the sole intent of stirring the pot. nonsenical crap like creating a system of forced birth control is not relevant to the subject at hand.
That is funny. I'm 100 percent for MAKING kids on birth control until the age of 18. I know it won't happen because people are fucking stupid. They make way too many excuses about doing the right thing. You think this is a bad idea. That is your business. Please don't sit there and tell me what I am interested in. I'm laughing at you because you think putting a teen on birth control wouldn't help. That is denial, son.
That is funny. I'm 100 percent for MAKING kids on birth control until the age of 18. I know it won't happen because people are fucking stupid. They make way too many excuses about doing the right thing. You think this is a bad idea. That is your business. Please don't sit there and tell me what I am interested in. I'm laughing at you because you think putting a teen on birth control wouldn't help. That is denial, son.
i'm saying it is absloutely implausible and completely unethical. ergo, it is irrelevant. i could care less if you want to be a member of the lunatic fringe, pops.
jack sommerset
12-01-2009, 11:10 AM
i'm saying it is absloutely implausible and completely unethical. ergo, it is irrelevant. i could care less is you want to be a member of the lunatic fringe, pops.
:lol ergo, it is irrelevent.
Mr Spock, I gots to run motherfucker but you are right on one thing. This is a waste of time for me. It's not unethical for teens to be on birth control. And asshole, when the pass this healthcare bill and tax payers are paying for abortions, I bet you will slowly come to my side of the fence. You will be fighting it but eventually you will say "That Jack Sommerset was right, I rather pay for mandated birth control instead of the killing baby business"
:lol ergo, it is irrelevent.
Mr Spock, I gots to run motherfucker but you are right on one thing. This is a waste of time for me. It's not unethical for teens to be on birth control. And asshole, when the pass this healthcare bill and tax payers are paying for abortions, I bet you will slowly come to my side of the fence. You will be fighting it but eventually you will say "That Jack Sommerset was right, I rather pay for mandated birth control instead of the killing baby business"
it is possible that i could suffer some severe head trauma, irreverisibly damage my frontal lobe, lose control of all rational thought and then agree with you on something. highly unlikely, but possible nonetheless.
Bender
12-01-2009, 11:25 AM
some good comments so far.
There should be way more vocational training at high schools.
my son is in middle school, 6th grade. He has in a "magnet school" program, where you have the normal academic classes (but at a pre-AP level) as well as additional classes/electives for practical stuff, such as web design, 3-D modeling, photoshop, multimedia, rocketry, robotics (ok the last two not really practical).
He likes it way better than his previous normal public school program, which was quote "dumb & boring". He hated it back when he was in 3rd - 5th grade in normal public school classes and he was being "undertought".
He wants to continue in the program thru 8th grade. I'm worried about after that, and he goes to a normal high school (Madison High School) - I hope he doesn't regress.
some good comments so far.
my son is in middle school, 6th grade. He has in a "magnet school" program, where you have the normal academic classes (but at a pre-AP level) as well as additional classes/electives for practical stuff, such as web design, 3-D modeling, photoshop, multimedia, rocketry, robotics (ok the last two not really practical).
He likes it way better than his previous normal public school program, which was quote "dumb & boring". He hated it back when he was in 3rd - 5th grade in normal public school classes and he was being "undertought".
He wants to continue in the program thru 8th grade. I'm worried about after that, and he goes to a normal high school (Madison High School) - I hope he doesn't regress.
actually, robotics could be quite practical. i do like the concept of magnet schools very much though. health careers, for instance, is a great one.
Bender
12-01-2009, 11:37 AM
actually, robotics could be quite practical. i do like the concept of magnet schools very much though. health careers, for instance, is a great one.
you know, back before this school year started, I had never heard of "magnet" schools. Until my son came home one day all excited about a presentation he saw at his 5th grade school about magnet school programs...
I'm glad he is in it. He is much more interested than usual in school (although not in math & english, lol). He chose robotics as an elective, and he chose some computer tech class for his regular tech class (he says he's doing stuff like photoshop, animation master, and some other computer stuff). I think the web design classes aren't offered until 7th or 8th grade.
TeyshaBlue
12-01-2009, 11:49 AM
No jack the parent problem is the biggie. my spaouse has taught for over 15 yrs and #1 on her list is parents who don't give a damn. In fact more times than not, she has meetings with parents and they end uip denying their kid has a problem and call her a racist. One funny moment was when a hispanic man told her that he knew she didn't like mexicans... our son is half mexican... so getting more parents involved is a big part of it.. I can post a graph if you'd like?
The parent problem is indeed a biggie. I'm not sure it's the biggie, but my 10 years in teaching reinforces what you've stated.
TeyshaBlue
12-01-2009, 12:01 PM
:tu
Great stuff.
Exactly, baseline bum nailed it. All students are not equal. Not all are destined for college...indeed for some, college would be an unmitigated disaster.
The "No Child Left Behind" lunacy of the Bush administration made this even worse with it's renewed emphasis on standardized testing and the actions connected to the results of same.
Awhile back, there was basically a two-tier approach to public ed.....College Prep or Vocational Ed. Now, there's room for arguement on the criteria for each, but at least there's an acknowledgement that not all will attend college and their educational needs are different.
coyotes_geek
12-01-2009, 12:11 PM
Exactly, baseline bum nailed it. All students are not equal. Not all are destined for college...indeed for some, college would be an unmitigated disaster.
The "No Child Left Behind" lunacy of the Bush administration made this even worse with it's renewed emphasis on standardized testing and the actions connected to the results of same.
Awhile back, there was basically a two-tier approach to public ed.....College Prep or Vocational Ed. Now, there's room for arguement on the criteria for each, but at least there's an acknowledgement that not all will attend college and their educational needs are different.
Agreed. I will say in middle school I think it's a good idea to see what you can do in terms of exposing students to both sides of that coin. But by the time the kids get to high school they need to be put on one track or the other.
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 12:48 PM
I doubt that incremental change will get the job done. What's needed is radical, drastic change plus a hard-nosed reappraisal of the whole idea of universal public education. In the USA, it is a dismal failure.
As it currently stands, our public schools are little more than minimum security detention facilities. Kids don't hate school just because the kids and their parents suck. They also hate it because school is like a prison and is not conducive to learning.
Academic and vocational tracks: primary education for everyone makes sense, but universal secondary level academics does not.
Hard admissions exams for high school and college make sense and preselect for excellence; whereas standardized testing functions mainly as a CYA for administrators, identifying which students need to be "dropped out" and requiring teachers to gear their classes to the mediocre middle.
Advancement should be based on demonstrated mastery of curriculum, rather than being age based. Some students can do it faster than others; let them. Some take a little bit longer; so long as the student is not excessively atrasado, that is no problem either.
Requirements for teachers ought to be very, very high, and their aptitude for teaching should be carefully evaluated. In order to attract highly qualified, highly motivated teachers, their pay should be correspondingly high. This money can come from what we currently give to our largely unnecessary, overpaid school administrators.
Giving kids the summer off is a bad idea. School them year round. It'll make the process shorter, and teachers won't have to spend half the fall reviewing what was taught in the spring.
I doubt that incremental change will get the job done. What's needed is radical, drastic change plus a hard-nosed reappraisal of the whole idea of universal public education. In the USA, it is a dismal failure.
agreed.
As it currently stands, our public schools are little more than minimum security detention facilities. Kids don't hate school just because the kids and their parents suck. They also hate it because school is like a prison and is not conducive to learning.
agreed
Academic and vocational tracks: primary education for everyone makes sense, but universal secondary level academics does not.
Hard admissions exams for high school and college make sense and preselect for excellence; whereas standardized testing functions mainly as a CYA for administrators, identifying which students need to be "dropped out" and requiring teachers to gear their classes to the mediocre middle.
slippery slope here. for one, who sets the admission standards? the schools, the districts, the state or the federal government ? secondly, who funds the schools? what parents will pay property taxes for a school their own children are denied admission to. If there are no property taxes where does the money come from?
as to the standarized tests and admission exams? who designs them? what are the basis of the testing?
Advancement should be based on demonstrated mastery of curriculum, rather than being age based. Some students can do it faster than others; let them. Some take a little bit longer; so long as the student is not excessively atrasado, that is no problem either.
what about emotional quotients ?
Requirements for teachers ought to be very, very high, and their aptitude for teaching should be carefully evaluated. In order to attract highly qualified, highly motivated teachers, their pay should be correspondingly high. This money can come from what we currently give to our largely unnecessary, overpaid school administrators.
that is nowhere near the amount of money need to really attract top notch talent to the teaching profession.
Giving kids the summer off is a bad idea. School them year round. It'll make the process shorter, and teachers won't have to spend half the fall reviewing what was taught in the spring.
this also requires more money but not a bad idea. getting parents on board may prove difficult.
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 01:56 PM
slippery slope here. for one, who sets the admission standards? The schools themselves.
secondly, who funds the schools?A very good question. I think that Federal power is too remote from the scene of education to do much good, but not too remote not to do harm. It's better left to the individual states IMO, plus whatever private money will endow.
what parents will pay property taxes for a school their own children are denied admission to Society as a whole reaps the benefit of education, but individual children may not qualify for secondary level academics. Them's the breaks. Study hard and retake the test if at first you don't succeed. If your kid can't pass after a number of tries, maybe advanced schooling isn't for him/her. Educational aptitude and attainment aren't equalitarian; why should opportunity be? (beyond primary schooling, which I think ought to be, if not universally available, as close to it as possible)
If there are no property taxes where does the money come from? The parents' own purse. Why should education be free?
as to the standarized tests and admission exams? who designs them? what are the basis of the testing? I'm against standardized tests. Pretty much period.
Entrance exams can be as they once were historically: designed by individual institutions, appropriate for themselves.
what about emotional quotients ?I'm not sure what you're talking about. What's an EQ?
that is nowhere near the amount of money need to really attract top notch talent to the teaching profession. According to one source I've read, about one hundred years ago, administrators were 5% of school employment; now they are about 50%. It seems commonsensical that if education were stressed over administration there'd be more money for teachers. Enough to atract highly professional teachers? Hard to say.
What makes you so sure it wouldn' be?
I don't necessarily disagree with you, rjv. But I am curious why you seem so certain about this.
spursncowboys
12-01-2009, 02:04 PM
This is all my opinion:
Are we saying that all the school systems are broke? I believe the lower the avg income of the school, the worse the problem. This isn't the case in 100% of the time but big enough that they are somehow connected.
Firstly, get rid of social promotion of any kind. Then I think we should do vouchers of some kind. In practically every situation, when kids, decided with the parents, go to a school of their choice and not location they produce better grades. Making schools smaller and more dividing. A school for K-3; 4-6; 7-9; and HS.
I also like the magnet schools idea. I agree that teaching a trade would be very beneficial. I read somewhere about kids that drop out get any job. They(kids) feel that having a job makes them feel more adult. That is why they will get a bad job and keep it so they feel successful. A good idea can be to give land tax cuts to parents who do not use the buses. Our HS and Comm College are very watered down and are more focused on promotion/graduation rates than a set standard. I also disagree with the teaching for a test that I have seen my family have to go through these past 5 years. Although I think it was a great revealer to our country's education system. There are some really good ideas from NCLB.
In regards to advancing our middle and high schools I think there should be different goals. Firstly, following the lead of the main character from "Lean on me", we should get rid of the bad apples. Going by degree of offense. have from SRC; Alternative, and then the Juvie school. I have known kids who went through the Bexar Co. school (all year round, uniforms, etc) and they got a better education with less gang problems. From there create more GT type classes. Categorize kids by grades. With the higher of the categories getting more scholarships. The fact is a HS diploma is worth about the amount it cost to pay for a GED. Kids know that so creating an incentive to, while young and stupid, stay in the race. I think then we focus, as a nation, on ways of advancing the top 40%(arbitrary number). With the teachers, we need to pay them better. I believe the problem with the teacher's union is they would be ok if the worst teacher got paid the same as the best. I think we need to help the good teachers stay in. I don't have the answer how to because the Principle would be the one hiring and firing and does not have an incentive to find the real good teachers from the bad ones.
Finally I feel that more basics needs to be taught in the early years. These teachers are in charge of these kids futures. Kids start to develop life long habits before 2nd grade.
The schools themselves.
okay but clearly there will be different standards. i wonder if this would mean that there would be parents who would then be trying to send their kids to other schools. that is, cross boundaries in order to get around one schools tougher criteria.
A very good question. I think that Federal power is too remote from the scene of education to do much good, but not too remote not to do harm. It's better left to the individual states IMO, plus whatever private money will endow.
inevitably, states will start borrowing from the feds. opening themselves and the schools up to the plethora of civil suits aimed at the unjust or biased admission standards.
Society as a whole reaps the benefit of education, but individual children may not qualify for secondary level academics. Them's the breaks. Study hard and retake the test if at first you don't succeed. If your kid can't pass after a number of tries, maybe advanced schooling isn't for him/her. Educational aptitude and attainment aren't equalitarian; why should opportunity be? (beyond primary schooling, which I think ought to be, if not universally available, as close to it as possible)
philsophically, this is where we are probably as diametrically opposed as we can be. there is a strong chance hear that those more inclined to have the necessary environment needed to succeed will do so and those in less favorable environs will continue to fail, resulting in an ever widening gap between the haves and have nots.
The parents' own purse. Why should education be free?
I'm against standardized tests. Pretty much period.
Entrance exams can be as they once were historically: designed by individual institutions, appropriate for themselves.
as am i but for that same reason i am not all that sure i could come to trust entrance exams.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. What's an EQ?
actually, i meant to indicate an EI or emotional intelligence quotient.
Emotional Intelligence (EI) describes the ability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ability), capacity, skill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill) or, in the case of the trait EI model, a self-perceived ability, to identify, assess, and manage the emotions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion) of one's self (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_(psychology)), of others, and of groups (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_Emotion)
According to one source I've read, about one hundred years ago, administrators were 5% of school employment; now they are about 50%. It seems commonsensical that if education were stressed over administration there'd be more money for teachers. Enough to atract highly professional teachers? Hard to say.
What makes you so sure it wouldn' be?
I don't necessarily disagree with you, rjv. But I am curious why you think you're right.
schools will still have administrative costs so there would still be funds needed to run them. also, those who feel they are worth a lot as far as salaries go would expect more than a mere 20% increase in salary. for instance a science teacher in the NISD makes about 45,000 per year and I do not think that a salary of 54,000 would get the best of the best to opt out of the private sector in order to teach.
another thing is what becomes of special ed programs? athletics? after care programs? band? the arts ?
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 03:02 PM
okay but clearly there will be different standards. i wonder if this would mean that there would be parents who would then be trying to send their kids to other schools. that is, cross boundaries in order to get around one schools tougher criteria. Sure. The trade off is that your kid's diploma might not be as prestigious. But I see no problem with schools having a variety of standards. Not every community is the same, so why should the schools be? As for there being better and worse schools, this has ever been the case. As a parent, it falls to you to do your homework on the quality of schools, and determine which ones might suit your kid best.
inevitably, states will start borrowing from the feds.If the states really want to fix education (and I am not sure at all that they do), this is the one thing they cannot do.
philsophically, this is where we are probably as diametrically opposed as we can be. there is a strong chance hear that those more inclined to have the necessary environment needed to succeed will do so and those in less favorable environs will continue to fail, resulting in an ever widening gap between the haves and have nots. To be completely clear, I have zero problem with social inequality. In my mind, the problem is that a lot of people don't have enough, and this is the worthy cause, not inequality per se. I suppose that inequality of wealth might in practice be so extreme that it is the proximate cause of scarcity, but this isn't irresistably true, nor is it demonstrably true for us that I have seen.
(As elsewhere above, I welcome your counterpoint here, rjv. I'm not wedded to my own opinion just because it is mine.)
as am i but for that same reason i am not all that sure i could come to trust entrance exams. Caveat emptor. It's more a matter of the value or prestige of the individual institution: if it is worth getting in, then it is worth braving the exam, however flawed it might be.
actually, i meant to indicate an EI or emotional intelligence quotient.
Emotional Intelligence (EI) describes the ability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ability), capacity, skill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill) or, in the case of the trait EI model, a self-perceived ability, to identify, assess, and manage the emotions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion) of one's self (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_%28psychology%29), of others, and of groups (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_Emotion)I agree that this is important in the context of education, but the emotional development and behavioral modification of children belong in the bailiwick of parents IMO. I am not sanguine that schools can accomplish it, or trustful that, if they can, that the modification will necessarily be conducive to learning or to the child. As currently constructed, schools are mainly designed promote passivity and compliance rather than emotional and behavioral maturity. If a child lacks the emotional maturity or behavioral self-discipline school requires, I scarcely see why it should fall to the schools to provide it, if in fact they can.
Perhaps you can give an example that shows what you mean. EI and education do not seem a natural fit to me, and I am skeptical that environment is a reliable predictor of aptitude. Even if it were, I don't really see how schools can be expected to remedy social inequality, if the student lacks the aptitude or ability (or the EI) to do the work.
another thing is what becomes of special ed programs? Those who can't cut it in the educational mainstream should have their own schools.
athletics? after care programs? band? the arts ? All fine extracurriculars. Desirable, yes. Necessary, no.
For those with special aptitude or motivation toward the fine arts, magnet schools already exist. I see no reason why this shouldn't continue to be the case.
Sure. The trade off is that your kid's diploma might not be as prestigious. But I see no problem with schools having a variety of standards. Not every community is the same, so why should the schools be? As for there being better and worse schools, this has ever been the case. As a parent, it falls to you to do your homework on the quality of schools, and determine which ones might suit your kid best.
will there be transportation available?
If the states really want to fix education (and I am not sure at all that they do), this is the one thing they cannot do.
in an economy like the one we have today i could not imagine how they could avoid it.
To be completely clear, I have zero problem with social inequality. In my mind, the problem is that a lot of people don't have enough, and this is the worthy cause, not inequality per se. I suppose that inequality of wealth might in practice be so extreme that it is the proximate cause of scarcity, but this isn't irresistably true, nor is it demonstrably true for us that I have seen.
well a very charitable father and jesuit training, not to mention my own personal beliefs have led me to feel deeply committed to the empowerment of the disenfranchised and there is no better point of origin than with children and education. but i have seen more than a fair share of very bright kids in very bad scenarios to know that they would be the first of the lot thrown to the pyres in a plan that depends on a stong support system from home.
Perhaps you can give an example that shows what you mean. EI and education do not seem a natural fit to me, and I am skeptical that environment is a reliable predictor of aptitude. Even if it were, I don't really see how schools can be expected to remedy social inequality, if the student lacks the aptitude or ability (or the EI) to do the work.
i was really more making the point of IE as it came to the notion of graduating kids at increments when they master a set of skills. they may be cognitively ready to be in another setting but not necessarily ready to be surrounded by older children.
Those who can't cut it in the educational mainstream should have their own schools.
i was actually referring to those with learning disabilities. if you are as well, i'd have to say i could never be that nihilistic. but perhaps we are not thinking of the same thing.
All fine extracurriculars. Desirable, yes. Necessary, no.
i'll have to disagree here. nothing helped me in math more than music. it is such an abstract and creative form of learing that i believe when introduced from an early age on can greatly improve the cognitive status of children. the notion of technology trumps all seems a bit outdated to me. i mean, the logical postivist experiment failed, no ?
For those with special aptitude or motivation toward the fine arts, magnet schools already exist. I see no reason why this shouldn't continue to be the case.
bands and music also exist at a level in public schools as well. and at a large level. taking away extracurricular activities puts a lot of kids out on the streets and kids with time on their hands is not always a good thing. football and track did wonders for keeping me as they kept me focused on physical fitness, training, setting goals and learning discipline. all exemplary traits that have a huge impact on one'e entire life.
it almost seems as if we are no longer talking about "fixing our public schools here" but rather creating a very idealistic and not very pragmatic paradigm to the test. one that is on the border of really being more of a private school system.
Blake
12-01-2009, 03:54 PM
I agree so far with:
*more vocational schooling/training - too many kids have no business being in book curriculum class, wasting my wife's time while she's trying to teach Spanish to the kids who want to be there
*scrap no child left behind - I don't know why I was surprised nobody really thought this through when they implented it
*entrance exam to high school - If we were to move 9th grade down to middle school level, then I think a middle school level education at this point is enough to function out in the real world.
If you can't get past the entrance exam, then go to a vocational school. Hell, if you don't want to go to school, then go to work....... Just stop wasting others' time in a classroom.
I don't agree with driver's license for diploma.
Neither is related in any way to the other and if a person can be a productive member of society without a high school diploma, then that person should not be punished by not allowing him/her to drive a vehicle.......especially if he/she has the means to buy one and are smart enough to drive one.
As for special ed classes, if a kid qualifies as special ed, then I don't see why those type of classes wouldn't continue on as they currently do.
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 05:07 PM
will there be transportation available? Students are responsible for their own attendance, parents presumably would help. If the community thinks it needful to provide, well and fine. If not, tough luck.
well a very charitable father and jesuit training, not to mention my own personal beliefs have led me to feel deeply committed to the empowerment of the disenfranchised Well and fine. Social melioration is well suited to religious missions; to public schools, not so well IMO.
but i have seen more than a fair share of very bright kids in very bad scenarios to know that they would be the first of the lot thrown to the pyres in a plan that depends on a stong support system from home. I'm fine with whatever level of support the schools themselves think it appropriate to provide, I just don't think they ought to be required to do so. Support given to the student at school will vary from place to place, just as it does now.
i was really more making the point of IE as it came to the notion of graduating kids at increments when they master a set of skills. they may be cognitively ready to be in another setting but not necessarily ready to be surrounded by older children. I can see that. But I can't really see how that's determinable with any great accuracy beforehand. Your own remedy puts a lot of trust in theraputic/bureaucratic helpers; IMO it's more to the point to give children as much responsibility for themselves and their work as they can carry.
i was actually referring to those with learning disabilities. if you are as well, i'd have to say i could never be that nihilistic. but perhaps we are not thinking of the same thing. The words "Special Ed", all by itself, did not disclose this particular meaning to me. I'll say right off the bat that I don't know anything about learning diabilities, so I'll be glad to learn from anybody at all who does.
i'll have to disagree here. nothing helped me in math more than music. it is such an abstract and creative form of learing that i believe when introduced from an early age on can greatly improve the cognitive status of children.Ok. That's your view.
the notion of technology trumps all seems a bit outdated to me. i mean, the logical postivist experiment failed, no ?Not sure what you're talking about here. Smells like a strawman.
bands and music also exist at a level in public schools as well. and at a large level. taking away extracurricular activities puts a lot of kids out on the streets and kids with time on their hands is not always a good thing. football and track did wonders for keeping me as they kept me focused on physical fitness, training, setting goals and learning discipline. all exemplary traits that have a huge impact on one'e entire life. I can buy that. These things aren't stricly related to education, but they might be helpful.
it almost seems as if we are no longer talking about "fixing our public schools here" but rather creating a very idealistic and not very pragmatic paradigm to the test. one that is on the border of really being more of a private school system I believe I started out by saying the whole idea of universal, free edeucation needs to be re-evaluated, so that shouldn't surprise you much. One effective fix for the public school system might be to abolish it.
TeyshaBlue
12-01-2009, 05:21 PM
it almost seems as if we are no longer talking about "fixing our public schools here" but rather creating a very idealistic and not very pragmatic paradigm to the test. one that is on the border of really being more of a private school system.
It's entirely possible, in some places, probable, that public schools are beyond "fixing".
Students are responsible for their own attendance, parents presumably would help. If the community thinks it needful to provide, well and fine. If not, tough luck.
there would have to be public transport. it is a big part of todays attendance. a lack of transportation for the schools would be an extreme hardship on parents. as for the tough luck on kids who are otherwise smart but just not fortunate enough to have a ride... no way i can ever agree with "tough luck" as the answer.
]Well and fine. Social melioration is well suited to religious missions; to public schools, not so well IMO.
well, again.. defined in completely different terms, that is as this new paradigm of "public" schools it most definitely would not. but even non-religious viewpoints support this. the categorical imperative comes to mind here.
I'm fine with whatever level of support the schools themselves think it appropriate to provide, I just don't think they ought to be required to do so. Support given to the student at school will vary from place to place, just as it does now.
I can see that. But I can't really see how that's determinable with any great accuracy beforehand. Your own remedy puts a lot of trust in theraputic/bureaucratic helpers; IMO it's more to the point to give children as much responsibility for themselves and their work as they can carry.
i can only assume here is that if a kid has a dad in jail and a drunk for a mom well.. "good luck kid but that's life".
The words "Special Ed", all by itself, did not disclose this particular meaning to me. I'll say right off the bat that I don't know anything about learning diabilities, so I'll be glad to learn from anybody at all who does.
surely you have heard of dyslexia, hearing impaired, handicapped kids, kids with neurological deficits....
Ok. That's your view.
not really. there is quite a bit of research to support this. for instance, the mozart effect. the part of the cortex, which contains the repertoire of spatial-temporal firing patterns, can be excited by music and is utilized in higher brain functions such as spatial-temporal thinking in mathematics.
Not sure what you're talking about here. Smells like a strawman.
my point was that it seems as if we are in a time where many advocate science and technology as the primary aspects of pedagogy and dismiss the arts and music as almost metaphysical constructs. i actually think the latter can be quite analytical and empirical. can you imagine using cubism to demontrate the possibilty of multiple dimensions in space to kids?
I can buy that. These things aren't stricly related to education, but they might be helpful.
education is also experience.
I believe I started out by saying the whole idea of universal, free edeucation needs to be re-evaluated, so that shouldn't surprise you much. One effective fix for the public school system might be to abolish it.
indeed.
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 05:52 PM
there would have to be public transport. it is a big part of todays attendance. a lack of transportation for the schools would be an extreme hardship on parents. as for the tough luck on kids who are otherwise smart but just not fortunate enough to have a ride... no way i can ever agree with "tough luck" as the answer. My point is, communities should be freer than they are now to prioritize expenses.
Transportation to and from school at this point is expected, and probably would be demanded by the public in any new scheme of education. But it might not be universally required, and where it is not, communities -- IMHO -- should be free to determine whether they need it or not.
well, again.. defined in completely different terms, that is as this new paradigm of "public" schools it most definitely would not. but even non-religious viewpoints support this. the categorical imperative comes to mind here. The categorical imperative mandates social melioration specifically in schools? Care to flesh that out? It isn't intuitive to me.
i can only assume here is that if a kid has a dad in jail and a drunk for a mom well.. "good luck kid but that's life".It would depend on the moral qualities of the community. Presumably, many communities would take various hardships into account; others might not. That's life. It ain't always fair.
surely you have heard of dyslexia, hearing impaired, handicapped kids, kids with neurological deficits....Sure. I still know next to nothing about them.
Still, it seems unrealistic to mandate accomodation for the whole spectrum of developmental/learning disabilities in all schools if the point is to have the best schools possible. It seems to me hasty to rule out alternative educational venues for at least some of these students.
not really. there is quite a bit of research to support this. for instance, the mozart effect. the part of the cortex, which contains the repertoire of spatial-temporal firing patterns, can be excited by music and is utilized in higher brain functions such as spatial-temporal thinking in mathematics. Seems plausible. If it works, it ain't stupid.
my point was that it seems as if we are in a time where many advocate science and technology as the primary aspects of pedagogy and dismiss the arts and music as almost metaphysical constructs.I think the arts and music have their place in education. To what extent should be determined, I think, by the schools themselves and the communities they serve, rather than by scientific or bureaucratic diktat.
i actually think the latter can be quite analytical and empirical. can you imagine using cubism to demontrate the possibilty of multiple dimensions in space to kids? Sure.
education is also experience. Fair enough.
Winehole23
12-01-2009, 06:02 PM
It seems to me, rjv, that where we differ is mainly in the role of scientific/bureaucratic management. Your solutions seem to presuppose it; my own identify it as one of the main problems. For me, the solution consists not in fixing the bureaucracy, but instead abolishing it wherever possible, and returning control to schools and communities.
DarrinS
12-01-2009, 06:37 PM
Govt sure runs the educational system like a well oiled machine. Just wait until they get their mitts on our medical system.
Yay! :cheer
Wild Cobra
12-01-2009, 08:32 PM
mandating birth control is not in any way, shape or form an idea on how to fix our public school system.
quite frankly, it is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard.
Maybe mandatory birth control is the answer.
Liberals like telling others how to live, why not here as well? Tell people that if they cannot raise a kid in a proper setting that they cannot have kids.
I personally think too many kids today are being raised outside of a family, and financial means, and I consider that Child Abuse.
Wild Cobra
12-01-2009, 08:36 PM
The schools really suck today. They were once a proud institution, but today, two major corrupting factors are involved. The Department of Education, and unions. Teachers are now all paid the same as the lowest common denominator, and cannot deviate outside of too many rules. Good teachers can no longer be good teachers, and too many who should be fired are protected by the unions.
The communities used to teach as needed. They can no longer do that under the current bureaucracies.
clambake
12-01-2009, 08:38 PM
says the welfare union member.
spursncowboys
12-01-2009, 09:43 PM
says the welfare union member.
So are you upset when people get off welfare? Is that not part of the plan? Someone who was never on welfare has no business talking about it IMO.
Nbadan
12-01-2009, 09:55 PM
mandating birth control is not in any way, shape or form an idea on how to fix our public school system.
quite frankly, it is one of the worst ideas i have ever heard.
That's Jacks 'ultimate solution' to everything...
Nbadan
12-01-2009, 10:03 PM
Advancement should be based on demonstrated mastery of curriculum, rather than being age based. Some students can do it faster than others; let them. Some take a little bit longer; so long as the student is not excessively atrasado, that is no problem either.
..actually, there is a big problem...you can't have 13, 14, 15 year old thugs, those are the regular failures, with 11 and 12 year olds....they will bully, they will corrupt, they will poison the classroom..retainees should be pulled out from the regular classroom and be put under one teacher system like in elementary..
Nbadan
12-01-2009, 10:09 PM
Requirements for teachers ought to be very, very high, and their aptitude for teaching should be carefully evaluated. In order to attract highly qualified, highly motivated teachers, their pay should be correspondingly high. This money can come from what we currently give to our largely unnecessary, overpaid school administrators.
The tougher the requirements the higher the pay, so if your expecting teachers to be 'highly qualified' your talking a starting salary well above 50K/year and probably closer to 100K/year after a few years.....school budgets can't accommodate that no matter what you think about administrator pay.... which I don't think is a problem at all....administrators make their money...if there is a problem in public schools its all the specialist that are needed to meet the needs of every student under no child left behind...
Nbadan
12-01-2009, 10:14 PM
...also, not everybody is made to teach...if you are that educated to teach, you are sought after for other areas of private business...and its much easier to make 50K+ being a trainer, or manager that it is to be a teacher, so turn-over is very high....if fact, teaching can be a very good ladder to a bigger career and that's what many people do...
Wild Cobra
12-01-2009, 10:50 PM
So are you upset when people get off welfare? Is that not part of the plan? Someone who was never on welfare has no business talking about it IMO.
He's just a fucking asshole and should be kicked off for his constant harassment.
He claims I'm a welfare recipient because my mother took food stamps for about 3 months when my parents divorced. She found employment, and got off.
I'm a union member not by choice. Some jobs you have to join to work. It's worse than a poll tax.
He gets so pathetic at times, crying about spilled milk.
Hey Clam... Go cry to your mommy.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 12:14 AM
The tougher the requirements the higher the pay, so if your expecting teachers to be 'highly qualified' your talking a starting salary well above 50K/year and probably closer to 100K/year after a few years.....school budgets can't accommodate that no matter what you think about administrator pay.... Perhaps if private money took as much pride in secondary ed as it does universities and endowed it accordingly, there'd be more money for teachers. Just a thought.
...if there is a problem in public schools its all the specialist that are needed to meet the needs of every student under no child left behind...I couldn't agree more. One-size-fits-all federalization of standards is a bad idea.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 12:18 AM
..actually, there is a big problem...you can't have 13, 14, 15 year old thugs, those are the regular failures, with 11 and 12 year olds....they will bully, they will corrupt, they will poison the classroom..retainees should be pulled out from the regular classroom and be put under one teacher system like in elementary..Entrance exams and curriculum based -- as opposed to age-grade -- promotion would weed out the *retainees*.
jacobdrj
12-02-2009, 12:24 AM
Why is lower education mandatory?
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 12:29 AM
Why is lower education mandatory?A basic level of literacy and numeracy is required for self-sufficiency in an advanced society.
Primary education is a social must; secondary ed and college should be reserved for anyone with proven (or otherwise compelling) aptitude. IMHO.
clambake
12-02-2009, 01:26 AM
He's just a fucking asshole and should be kicked off for his constant harassment.
He claims I'm a welfare recipient because my mother took food stamps for about 3 months when my parents divorced. She found employment, and got off.
I'm a union member not by choice. Some jobs you have to join to work. It's worse than a poll tax.
He gets so pathetic at times, crying about spilled milk.
Hey Clam... Go cry to your mommy.
why don't you take your complaints to the owners of spurstalk.
you were happy when soldiers that complained about the war were killed.
remember?
you want to shoot women and their children if crossing the border.
remember?
you are only here because of us.
remember?
you spend all your money on a whore named amanda.
remember?
you stalk women on the internet.
remember?
It seems to me, rjv, that where we differ is mainly in the role of scientific/bureaucratic management. Your solutions seem to presuppose it; my own identify it as one of the main problems. For me, the solution consists not in fixing the bureaucracy, but instead abolishing it wherever possible, and returning control to schools and communities.
i could never fully realize why noam chomsky considered himself an anarchist. i mean here is this political dissident who constantly asks the government to be more engaged in social reform. until i realized that, conservative or liberal, if you really wanted to get the point of absolute reform and change you would have to do so incrementally. the financial impetus would have to be initially sprung up from the government. in time one would hope that communities would then get control.
A basic level of literacy and numeracy is required for self-sufficiency in an advanced society.
Primary education is a social must; secondary ed and college should be reserved for anyone with proven (or otherwise compelling) aptitude. IMHO.
just a question out of curiosity. where do the kids that do not get entrance into secondary education go ?
Maybe mandatory birth control is the answer.
Liberals like telling others how to live, why not here as well? Tell people that if they cannot raise a kid in a proper setting that they cannot have kids.
I personally think too many kids today are being raised outside of a family, and financial means, and I consider that Child Abuse.
it is not the answer because it is impossible. how do you get hundreds of thousands of girls on the pill? how do you monitor them? how do you pay for it? how do you deal with the potential side effects ? who treats the side effects? who handles the class action suits ?
it is a preposterous notion.
would real conservatives who are really opposed to any sort of government control really advocate the most ultimate form of control? that of our own or our children's bodies ?
spursncowboys
12-02-2009, 11:24 AM
He's just a fucking asshole and should be kicked off for his constant harassment.
He claims I'm a welfare recipient because my mother took food stamps for about 3 months when my parents divorced. She found employment, and got off.
I'm a union member not by choice. Some jobs you have to join to work. It's worse than a poll tax.
He gets so pathetic at times, crying about spilled milk.
Hey Clam... Go cry to your mommy.
My mom was on welfare a few times in her life. It helped me to see the fallacies behind it. Most of my friends from school are on it and have become slaves to it because they don't want to lose this magical free money. It's immoral to do that to people IMO.
coyotes_geek
12-02-2009, 11:25 AM
Maybe mandatory birth control is the answer.
Liberals like telling others how to live, why not here as well? Tell people that if they cannot raise a kid in a proper setting that they cannot have kids.
I personally think too many kids today are being raised outside of a family, and financial means, and I consider that Child Abuse.
I like it. And when mandatory birth control fails, mandatory abortions. That will show those libs.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 11:48 AM
just a question out of curiosity. where do the kids that do not get entrance into secondary education go ?Presumably, that's what the vocational track is for. Train kids for a trade or get them apprenticeships. The goal should be that every child has a high school diploma(or a college degree) OR a viable trade by age 18. The kids who can't hack it in schools and vo-tech will drop out, like they do right now.
ElNono
12-02-2009, 11:49 AM
I like it. And when mandatory birth control fails, mandatory abortions. That will show those libs.
:lol
Presumably, that's what the vocational track is for. Train kids for a trade or get them apprenticeships. The goal should be that every child has a high school diploma(or a college degree) OR a viable trade by age 18. The kids who can't hack it in schools and vo-tech will drop out, like they do right now.
this would not be a bad idea. it would be very nice if the vocational school grads could also have strong opportunities with community colleges. also, i would think that vocational school grads should also be given the opportunity to attend universities as well provided they met the admission standards. (in the same way that GED grads can that is).
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 12:15 PM
this would not be a bad idea. it would be very nice if the vocational school grads could also have strong opportunities with community colleges. also, i would think that vocational school grads should also be given the opportunity to attend universities as well provided they met the admission standards. (in the same way that GED grads can that is).Sure, why not.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 12:26 PM
i could never fully realize why noam chomsky considered himself an anarchist. i mean here is this political dissident who constantly asks the government to be more engaged in social reform. until i realized that, conservative or liberal, if you really wanted to get the point of absolute reform and change you would have to do so incrementally.Giving schools and states the ability to opt-out of federal standards and money might be one incremental path. It would require significant courage and ingenuity on the part of the schools and states, but it might be doable.
the financial impetus would have to be initially sprung up from the government. in time one would hope that communities would then get controlIf the government pays, it will never surrender control.
Kori Ellis
12-02-2009, 12:44 PM
you spend all your money on a whore named amanda.
remember?
you stalk women on the internet.
remember?
Simmer down a bit. You guys can hate each other's political/moral/social views all you want. And you can call each other names, but leave people's significant others, wives, kids, friends, etc out of it.
Thanks.
clambake
12-02-2009, 12:48 PM
Simmer down a bit. You guys can hate each other's political/moral/social views all you want. And you can call each other names, but leave people's significant others, wives, kids, friends, etc out of it.
Thanks.
:lol what about mothers?
Giving schools and states the ability to opt-out of federal standards and money might be one incremental path. It would require significant courage and ingenuity on the part of the schools and states, but it might be doable.
If the government pays, it will never surrender control.
this is the paradox of reform. it would need funding. the government would often be the source of this funding. but why would a government essentially choose to off itself ? only an administration voted into office that would be willing to surrender certain programs to such changes would be capable of this. but that is not going to happen any time soon.
clambake
12-02-2009, 01:08 PM
Giving schools and states the ability to opt-out of federal standards and money might be one incremental path. It would require significant courage and ingenuity on the part of the schools and states, but it might be doable.
giving a school the ability to opt out would put the entire burden on the parents of that schools students. that would be a private school. the parents would look for support other than themselves.
saddling the community would make for some good discussion.
then we could move to privatize our police departments. imagine the areas that would be without patrol.
wouldn't this just widen the gap even further?
TeyshaBlue
12-02-2009, 02:02 PM
giving a school the ability to opt out would put the entire burden on the parents of that schools students. that would be a private school. the parents would look for support other than themselves.
saddling the community would make for some good discussion.
then we could move to privatize our police departments. imagine the areas that would be without patrol.
wouldn't this just widen the gap even further?
A .20$/gallon state gas tax would handle our education funding quite nicely, I would think. Privatization would undoubtably take place, as it does now, but it wouldn't be inevitable as you describe it.
coyotes_geek
12-02-2009, 02:05 PM
A .20$/gallon state gas tax would handle our education funding quite nicely, I would think. Privatization would undoubtably take place, as it does now, but it wouldn't be inevitable as you describe it.
Texas is already doing that. 25% of the gas tax proceeds already go towards education.
On a related note, our transportation infrastructure is underfunded...........
TeyshaBlue
12-02-2009, 02:17 PM
Texas is already doing that. 25% of the gas tax proceeds already go towards education.
On a related note, our transportation infrastructure is underfunded...........
We haven't increased the gas tax since 1991. Rep. Senator John Carona is already calling for a 10 cent/gal increase to fund highway projects. Another .10 cents would go along way towards funding education in Texas.
EmptyMan
12-02-2009, 02:32 PM
Throw more money @ the schools. It has worked wonders in the past :toast
More gas tax, yayyyyyyyy. It's not like we drive big trucks in Texas or anything. :toast
coyotes_geek
12-02-2009, 02:33 PM
We haven't increased the gas tax since 1991. Rep. Senator John Carona is already calling for a 10 cent/gal increase to fund highway projects. Another .10 cents would go along way towards funding education in Texas.
Didn't mean to hijack the thread and start a discussion about the gas tax. But I do agree that it needs to be raised. Personally, I'd prefer not to divert any gas tax money away from transportation and that we find some other mechanism to fund education. But maybe that's just me.
TeyshaBlue
12-02-2009, 02:33 PM
Throw more money @ the schools. It has worked wonders in the past :toast
More gas tax, yayyyyyyyy.
Um not so much. We're talking about how to fund schools if we divorce ourselves from Federal guidelines and funding.
TeyshaBlue
12-02-2009, 02:35 PM
Didn't mean to hijack the thread and start a discussion about the gas tax. But I do agree that it needs to be raised. Personally, I'd prefer not to divert any gas tax money away from transportation and that we find some other mechanism to fund education. But maybe that's just me.
I think it's a reasonable component of the discussion. If we want to address the shortcomings in our schools, ie the OP, then funding will be an inevitable component of that discussion.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 02:52 PM
Um not so much. We're talking about how to fund schools if we divorce ourselves from Federal guidelines and funding.EM isn't real big on context. Or discussion. Or reading for that matter.
The only thing he seems to like is ripping on other posters. Mostly nonsensically, as above.
TeyshaBlue
12-02-2009, 02:55 PM
EM isn't real big on context. Or discussion. Or reading for that matter.
That's never stopped me.:lol:toast
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 03:24 PM
What is the internet for, besides porn and gambling?
jacobdrj
12-02-2009, 05:58 PM
A basic level of literacy and numeracy is required for self-sufficiency in an advanced society.
Primary education is a social must; secondary ed and college should be reserved for anyone with proven (or otherwise compelling) aptitude. IMHO.
If we are failing as bad as people claim, how would making schools optional change any of that? Parents are still the number 1 teacher in terms of basic reading and math, and those who know they are incapable of imparting that knowledge on the kids can still put their kids in school in an optional system.
Also, with child labour laws, it isn't like the kids would be doing anything else.
Winehole23
12-02-2009, 06:11 PM
If we are failing as bad as people claim, how would making schools optional change any of that?Why waste time, money and effort on kids who don't want to be there or can't cut it? Sure, it gets kids off the street, but is that really what schools are for?
jacobdrj
12-02-2009, 06:16 PM
Why waste time, money and effort on kids who don't want to be there or can't cut it? Sure, it gets kids off the street, but is that really what schools are for?
That was sort of what I was getting at.
spursncowboys
12-02-2009, 06:24 PM
Why waste time, money and effort on kids who don't want to be there or can't cut it? Sure, it gets kids off the street, but is that really what schools are for?
I honestly believe that should be the case for some kids. Laws should make them go to school. However there needs to be a way where they get those kind out of regular schools. Bad attitudes are infectious. In neisd, they had a school called Center school. I always, jokingly, said it was around to keep kids from comitting crimes in the day time. You basically showed up and tried and they passed you. You had to do your work and worked on your own level. The diploma's there took away the worth, but that is why I believe to make an incentive towards helping with funding of college or training programs.
spursncowboys
12-02-2009, 06:26 PM
We shouldn't give kids the right to go to school and then give them a helping hand(welfare) down the road when their choices turn out wrong.
ElNono
12-02-2009, 11:08 PM
We shouldn't give kids the right to go to school and then give them a helping hand(welfare) down the road when their choices turn out wrong.
What do you suggest to do if they make the wrong choice when their intellect is not really evolved enough to make such a choice? Do we shot them?
clambake
12-02-2009, 11:37 PM
What do you suggest to do if they make the wrong choice when their intellect is not really evolved enough to make such a choice? Do we shot them?
no shit. if this were implemented long ago, these assholes wouldn't be alive to make these stupid opinions.
spursncowboys
12-02-2009, 11:39 PM
What do you suggest to do if they make the wrong choice when their intellect is not really evolved enough to make such a choice? Do we shot them?
Don't be an asshole. The point is all of the school's resources should not be consistently wasted on kids doing wrong. The NE side did an ok job of seperating kids getting in trouble. From ISS, SRC, Alternative and finally JJARP I think is the acronym. It's bexar county jail school. I also think gang members should automatically be seperated.
Teachers are the key.
We don't value them in this society. If we did, we would pay them better.
We turn over most of our parental functions to teachers, and then want them to do our job and the traditional teaching job and pay them like we would pay nannies or baby sitters.
There are a lot of really bad teachers out there right now. There are a lot of really bad parents out there right now. If we incented teachers better by paying them better, more competent people would be drawn to it. Some people really consider it a vocation and would do it for almost any amount of money. But, just like with everything else, if you want the absolute best, you have to figure out a better incentive system.
Let me ask you this. If you have a college degree in math and someone offers you a job in a private company that uses your math skills for product development at a salary of 45-60K per annum, and someone offers you a teaching job that uses your math skills at say 25-35K per annum, plus you get to deal with bratty kids, obnoxious (or uncaring)parents, and know that you will struggle to make enough money to give your kids the kind of education that you yourself got, what decision would you make?
And if you say you would teach, how would you justify that decision in light of your own parental obligations to your kids?
I faced that decision. I understand that I live in a capitalist society. I don't have a problem with that. But when I was teaching in a state university making less than some starting young manager in private industry, I recognised that I needed to pay attention to what my society was telling me. So I went to work in private industry and made ten times as much money in short order than I ever would have in a university setting.
Then I could give my kids a good education...and did.
When education is important to us, we will pay educators enough to attract and retain the best in their fields. Until then, our schools get worse and worse.
It's the American way.
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 09:11 AM
Teachers are the key.
We don't value them in this society. If we did, we would pay them better.
We turn over most of our parental functions to teachers, and then want them to do our job and the traditional teaching job and pay them like we would pay nannies or baby sitters.
There are a lot of really bad teachers out there right now. There are a lot of really bad parents out there right now. If we incented teachers better by paying them better, more competent people would be drawn to it. Some people really consider it a vocation and would do it for almost any amount of money. But, just like with everything else, if you want the absolute best, you have to figure out a better incentive system.
Let me ask you this. If you have a college degree in math and someone offers you a job in a private company that uses your math skills for product development at a salary of 45-60K per annum, and someone offers you a teaching job that uses your math skills at say 25-35K per annum, plus you get to deal with bratty kids, obnoxious (or uncaring)parents, and know that you will struggle to make enough money to give your kids the kind of education that you yourself got, what decision would you make?
And if you say you would teach, how would you justify that decision in light of your own parental obligations to your kids?
I faced that decision. I understand that I live in a capitalist society. I don't have a problem with that. But when I was teaching in a state university making less than some starting young manager in private industry, I recognised that I needed to pay attention to what my society was telling me. So I went to work in private industry and made ten times as much money in short order than I ever would have in a university setting.
Then I could give my kids a good education...and did.
When education is important to us, we will pay educators enough to attract and retain the best in their fields. Until then, our schools get worse and worse.
It's the American way.
I agree that we should pay them more. I think there should be a better way of giving raises besides seniority. There has to be a way to give raises to good teachers. I don't mean going by taks, because they'll just teach them to pass a test all year like they did to my niece and nephew.
Teachers should not have to have all these years of school and then take a low wage job. I think they have free college if you promise to teach for a certain amount of years in NM, Im not sure about Texas.
I agree that we should pay them more. I think there should be a better way of giving raises besides seniority. There has to be a way to give raises to good teachers. I don't mean going by taks, because they'll just teach them to pass a test all year like they did to my niece and nephew.
Teachers should not have to have all these years of school and then take a low wage job. I think they have free college if you promise to teach for a certain amount of years in NM, Im not sure about Texas.
Definitely, tenure should be a thing of the past, and seniority-based raises incent the wrong thing.
You mentioned (or somebody did) the gender-specific programs. They are most useful for middle and high school grades, I think. They do actually improve focus, simply because they remove a source of distraction for that age group, particularly, i.e., adolescent hormone-driven antics that make it harder for those age groups to focus on their intellect. The down side of that is the kids grow up not learning how to treat members of the opposite sex in a setting othr than their homes. So, it delays some of the social maturation process. This gets back to my earlier point about us wanting our schools to do so many things that should be done in the home, i.e., soical training, manners, etc., etc.
The truth is, I don't think public education can accomplish much more than skill transfer, and to the extent that we ask it to simultaneously provide health care ( vaccinations, etc.), social development, culture transfer, etc., etc., I think we dilute the primary mission and the ancillary functions as well.
What we really need in conjunction with any public school reform is parent-training as a requirement for child-birth medical care. I know it sounds socialistic. It probably IS socialistic. But until we break the cycle we have in place right now, I don't see accomplishing one without the other.
God, I read what I just wrote and the libertarian side of me recoils. I just don't know how to instill responsiblity in parents, who have a major role in their childrens' education, without forcing it in this day and age.
Winehole23
12-03-2009, 09:48 AM
The truth is, I don't think public education can accomplish much more than skill transfer, and to the extent that we ask it to simultaneously provide health care ( vaccinations, etc.), social development, culture transfer, etc., etc., I think we dilute the primary mission and the ancillary functions as well.I agree. The in loco parentis thing went too far; but if responsibility for social development and culture transfer shifted back significantly to parents, a lot of them wouldn't be up to it. I'm not sure there's any way to fix that.
jack sommerset
12-03-2009, 10:07 AM
That's Jacks 'ultimate solution' to everything...
You really are a fucking idiot :lol
I bet if noone gets pregnant before they are 19, more than 40% of the dropouts we have now would not have dropped out. Maybe even higher.
Alot of Obama dems ask questions but when they get answers they go fucking nuts and say stupid shit like 'birth control is Jacks ultimate solution'. Cynical dumb fucks is what you are. You just want to bitch,feel sorry for yourselves and blame other people who don't have this shitty attitude.
TeyshaBlue
12-03-2009, 10:51 AM
I agree that we should pay them more. I think there should be a better way of giving raises besides seniority. There has to be a way to give raises to good teachers. I don't mean going by taks, because they'll just teach them to pass a test all year like they did to my niece and nephew.
Teachers should not have to have all these years of school and then take a low wage job. I think they have free college if you promise to teach for a certain amount of years in NM, Im not sure about Texas.
I'm currently making 2.5 times my last teaching salary with a waaaay easier job. When I retired from teaching, I took a full commission sales job in a real pressure cooker of a company. The sales reps would look at me and ask why the pressure never seemed to get to me. I would simply say, "Pressure? This is a friggin vacation compared to my last teaching gig." :lol
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 10:52 AM
You mentioned (or somebody did) the gender-specific programs. They are most useful for middle and high school grades, I think. They do actually improve focus, simply because they remove a source of distraction for that age group, particularly, i.e., adolescent hormone-driven antics that make it harder for those age groups to focus on their intellect. The down side of that is the kids grow up not learning how to treat members of the opposite sex in a setting othr than their homes. So, it delays some of the social maturation process. This gets back to my earlier point about us wanting our schools to do so many things that should be done in the home, i.e., soical training, manners, etc., etc.
I think making girls/ boys classes is a great idea. Studies show time and again that girls advance in that situation. Also, remembering my school time and hearing the way kids talk to girls now walking down the street there is a discourse of how opposite sexes should treat each other. Going a little farther than the normal adolescence type but just crude towards each other. There has to be a good way of focusing on education and social development. Maybe science, math and language can be same sex classes.
TeyshaBlue
12-03-2009, 10:54 AM
I agree. The in loco parentis thing went too far; but if responsibility for social development and culture transfer shifted back significantly to parents, a lot of them wouldn't be up to it. I'm not sure there's any way to fix that.
You cannot fix irresponsibility, I'm afraid. You can, however, anticipate it's results and try to construct a strategy that allows for this loss without a negative impact to the schools in general...ie, alternative campuses.
i attended an all boys private school. i can tell you that we were as rowdy and unfocused a group as any other group of adolescent males.
Winehole23
12-03-2009, 11:27 AM
What we really need in conjunction with any public school reform is parent-training as a requirement for child-birth medical care. I know it sounds socialistic. It probably IS socialistic. But until we break the cycle we have in place right now, I don't see accomplishing one without the other.This is a theraputic/bureaucratic fix, but it is far less extreme and far more measured than the forced birth control and state credentialling of parents (to have children) proposed by some of this board's "rugged individualists."
God, I read what I just wrote and the libertarian side of me recoils. I just don't know how to instill responsiblity in parents, who have a major role in their childrens' education, without forcing it in this day and age.Well then, you have a conscience. Cheers to that. :tu
Jack still seems to think adolescents should be forced to use BC. I hope EM was just kidding about his own Chinese style solution to bad parenting -- letting the state regulate childbirth is repugnant to liberty and just a bad idea.
I hope EM was just kidding about his own Chinese style solution to bad parenting -- letting the state regulate childbirth is repugnant to liberty and just a bad idea.
yeah, i was wondering if jack ever caugh the irony of his being so in line with the chinese.
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 11:33 AM
you cannot fix irresponsibility, i'm afraid. You can, however, anticipate it's results and try to construct a strategy that allows for this loss without a negative impact to the schools in general...ie, alternative campuses.
+1
desflood
12-03-2009, 12:39 PM
We need to take it out of the hands of the federal government, then tear it down and rebuild it from the bottom up. It's ridiculous for us to assume that they can "fix" what they've driven into the ground. It may sound impossible, but I don't believe it is. I think there are still just enough responsible, intelligent, educated parents left to be able to do it. I agree that more vocational schools should be established and the children of the parents who don't want or are too lazy/uninvolved to participate should attend those. If the kids of those parents want to set themselves apart from their families and choose to further their education, sponsorships or scholarships need to be set up for them.
jacobdrj
12-03-2009, 01:32 PM
Why do primary school teachers get paid so little (25k-30k), yet college professors get paid so much (40k-120k)?
I know why, but it is interesting to think about on light of the previous setup comments.
duhoh
12-03-2009, 01:54 PM
get more parents to give a damn.
:tu
word
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 02:01 PM
:tu
word
Parents are more involved when they get to pick the schools they want their kids to go to. Kids also do better.
jacobdrj
12-03-2009, 02:03 PM
Parents are more involved when they get to pick the schools they want their kids to go to. Kids also do better.
This is true. You could argue that 'busing' killed the public school system. But are we as a society ready to allow self segregation to occur should busing be eliminated? Can we deal with those repercussions?
That is what happens in charter schools with large minority/majority populations in close proximity. I have seen it 1st hand here in metro Detroit.
jacobdrj
12-03-2009, 02:23 PM
I am having a hard time understanding what is 'wrong' with public schools. Learning is an active process, a 2 way street between the teacher and the student. A failed school is one where a child legitimately tries for a goal, to succeed, and fails because there is no venue for his efforts. What kids who have tried to succeed have failed? If we are talking about straight numbers of literacy for a school and blaming teachers, then isn't that turning the learning experience into a 1 way street and a cop-out of our parents for not motivating their children, or children being taught too young a stage in their particular lives to care?
Blake
12-03-2009, 02:42 PM
a basic level of literacy and numeracy is required for self-sufficiency in an advanced society.
Primary education is a social must; secondary ed and college should be reserved for anyone with proven (or otherwise compelling) aptitude. Imho.
too bad this isn't a +1 for everybody.....imo
Blake
12-03-2009, 02:50 PM
Teachers are the key.
We don't value them in this society. If we did, we would pay them better.
We turn over most of our parental functions to teachers, and then want them to do our job and the traditional teaching job and pay them like we would pay nannies or baby sitters.
There are a lot of really bad teachers out there right now. There are a lot of really bad parents out there right now. If we incented teachers better by paying them better, more competent people would be drawn to it. Some people really consider it a vocation and would do it for almost any amount of money. But, just like with everything else, if you want the absolute best, you have to figure out a better incentive system.
Let me ask you this. If you have a college degree in math and someone offers you a job in a private company that uses your math skills for product development at a salary of 45-60K per annum, and someone offers you a teaching job that uses your math skills at say 25-35K per annum, plus you get to deal with bratty kids, obnoxious (or uncaring)parents, and know that you will struggle to make enough money to give your kids the kind of education that you yourself got, what decision would you make?
And if you say you would teach, how would you justify that decision in light of your own parental obligations to your kids?
I faced that decision. I understand that I live in a capitalist society. I don't have a problem with that. But when I was teaching in a state university making less than some starting young manager in private industry, I recognised that I needed to pay attention to what my society was telling me. So I went to work in private industry and made ten times as much money in short order than I ever would have in a university setting.
Then I could give my kids a good education...and did.
When education is important to us, we will pay educators enough to attract and retain the best in their fields. Until then, our schools get worse and worse.
It's the American way.
Parents are the key. Society should not be turning over parental functions to teachers or principals.
Blake
12-03-2009, 02:55 PM
Why do primary school teachers get paid so little (25k-30k), yet college professors get paid so much (40k-120k)?
I know why, but it is interesting to think about on light of the previous setup comments.
if you live in San Antonio, you are misinformed about teacher salaries.
Northeast and Northside school districts start out at $47k.
I also don't think college professors get paid over $100k unless they are tenured dept chairs.......and even then......
if you live in San Antonio, you are misinformed about teacher salaries.
Northeast and Northside school districts start out at $47k.
I also don't think college professors get paid over $100k unless they are tenured dept chairs.......and even then......
correct-it is hard to make a top salary as even a colleg prof. getting tenure is a pain in the ass and one has to work their way up from lecturer to visiting prof to assistant prof and then hope they eventually get tenured.
coyotes_geek
12-03-2009, 03:50 PM
Let me preface this by saying I'm not claiming that teachers are or are not adequately paid for the work that they do. But the theory that students will perform better if we give the teachers more money gets tried every time the state legislature meets and it never works. IIRC, when Bush was governor Texas passed the largest teacher pay increase in state history and where did it get us? I won't argue with anyone who says that teachers deserve more money, but if the conversation is how to get the kids a better education then simply giving the teachers more money is a concept that has a proven track record of failure.
mogrovejo
12-03-2009, 04:12 PM
Subsidize the students/parents instead of the schools. Give the families the liberty to choice what school they want to provide education to their children.
baseline bum
12-03-2009, 04:48 PM
Why do primary school teachers get paid so little (25k-30k), yet college professors get paid so much (40k-120k)?
I know why, but it is interesting to think about on light of the previous setup comments.
College professors are experts in their fields, and who says $40k-$120k is a lot for a field as competitive as that?
Blake
12-03-2009, 05:16 PM
sidebar: school districts getting their money from property taxes sucks.
I'm not sure where the funding would come otherwise, but I just know it sucks.
It's also pretty stupid that lottery money goes towards education.
sidebar: school districts getting their money from property taxes sucks.
I'm not sure where the funding would come otherwise, but I just know it sucks.
It's also pretty stupid that lottery money goes towards education.
and it has been over 20 years since edgewood v kirby and we have still made no progress regarding funding based on property taxes
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:21 PM
Starting teacher salaries are very competitive with private business, trouble is that you can be teaching for 10+ years and still be in the 40's, compared to a similar private industry job where you could be in the mid $50s, $60 or $70s...that's why there are so many very good certified teachers in TX not teaching...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:28 PM
I am having a hard time understanding what is 'wrong' with public schools. Learning is an active process, a 2 way street between the teacher and the student. A failed school is one where a child legitimately tries for a goal, to succeed, and fails because there is no venue for his efforts. What kids who have tried to succeed have failed? If we are talking about straight numbers of literacy for a school and blaming teachers, then isn't that turning the learning experience into a 1 way street and a cop-out of our parents for not motivating their children, or children being taught too young a stage in their particular lives to care?
There is a lack of fundamentals in society that goes much deeper than just schools...schools are just the easy scapegoat....old folks complain that kids can't do math, science or even read very well, but at the same time these kids are cyber-communicating, blogging, researching, flying planes....doing information circles around these old coots...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:32 PM
Parents are the key. Society should not be turning over parental functions to teachers or principals.
Parents are a VERY important key, but they aren't just THE key, it really does take a village to raise a child...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:35 PM
I also don't think college professors get paid over $100k unless they are tenured dept chairs.......and even then......
Apples and Oranges...ALL college professors teach one way...lecturing...
...you wouldn't last very long as a teacher that way..
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:38 PM
correct-it is hard to make a top salary as even a colleg prof. getting tenure is a pain in the ass and one has to work their way up from lecturer to visiting prof to assistant prof and then hope they eventually get tenured.
Seriously, getting paid to research and write about stuff you love all day....where's my $100+K?
ploto
12-03-2009, 07:39 PM
Education in this country went way downhill when adults decided that they had to act like everything that every kid does is wonderful. Oh, no- teachers can't put kids into reading groups and every kid has to get a trophy!! The parents are the worse. I have watched them demand that a school quit recognizing the honor roll because it hurts the self-esteem of the kids who don't make it. People have watered down what achievement actually is so that accomplishing something means very little.
On another note, I am not an advocate of single-gender classrooms. I have a son whom I would never want in an all-boys' school or classroom.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:42 PM
Education in this country went way downhill when adults decided that they had to act like everything that every kid does is wonderful. Oh, no- teachers can't put kids into reading groups and every kid has to get a trophy!!.
You need to turn off the talk radio dude.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:48 PM
Let me preface this by saying I'm not claiming that teachers are or are not adequately paid for the work that they do. But the theory that students will perform better if we give the teachers more money gets tried every time the state legislature meets and it never works. IIRC, when Bush was governor Texas passed the largest teacher pay increase in state history and where did it get us? I won't argue with anyone who says that teachers deserve more money, but if the conversation is how to get the kids a better education then simply giving the teachers more money is a concept that has a proven track record of failure.
As I've stated before, attracting starting teachers isn't the problem, its keeping experienced teachers that's the problem...I'm not sure what the solution is there...maybe offering teachers a nice guaranteed retirement with Congressional type medical benefits after 20+ years of service..
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 07:55 PM
You need to turn off the talk radio dude.
He has a point. By creating a false sense of accomplishment it, iMO, has created a fake confidence. It is not the biggest problem, but it is a cultural problem that should at the least be discussed.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 07:57 PM
Subsidize the students/parents instead of the schools. Give the families the liberty to choice what school they want to provide education to their children.
How is changing the way we pay for schools gonna make schools better? You'll still have the same teachers, same administrators, and the same curriculum...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 08:00 PM
He has a point. By creating a false sense of accomplishment it, iMO, has created a fake confidence. It is not the biggest problem, but it is a cultural problem that should at the least be discussed.
There is no false sense of accomplishments..some kids work very hard...
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 08:03 PM
There is no false sense of accomplishments..some kids work very hard...
Giving every kid a sense of accomplishment, regardless of their action or final product, will take away from the worth of accomplishment. Soon kids are more interested in getting a 'that a boy' than creating a goal and accomplishing it.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 08:12 PM
Giving every kid a sense of accomplishment, regardless of their action or final product, will take away from the worth of accomplishment. Soon kids are more interested in getting a 'that a boy' than creating a goal and accomplishing it.
...goal setting should be thought at home and reinforced at school...you can't easily teach kids who have never been taught to goal-set to all of the sudden be goal-setters....
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 08:18 PM
...goal setting should be thought at home and reinforced at school...you can't easily teach kids who have never been taught to goal-set to all of the sudden be goal-setters....
So our school system should lower their standards because some kids aren't taught it? I feel that schools are the perfect place to teach kids this, if not schools, then what will these kids do with college in mind.
mogrovejo
12-03-2009, 08:26 PM
How is changing the way we pay for schools gonna make schools better? You'll still have the same teachers, same administrators, and the same curriculum...
It'd empower the consumer instead of the bureoucrat. Given the chance, parents tend to pick the best school for their kids. Bad teaches, bad administrators, bad curricula would be run out of the market by better competitors.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 08:35 PM
So our school system should lower their standards because some kids aren't taught it? I feel that schools are the perfect place to teach kids this, if not schools, then what will these kids do with college in mind.
Who said anything about lowering standards? ....quit setting up straw men..
....goal-setting is a problem for alot of kids, even in college...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 08:39 PM
It'd empower the consumer instead of the bureoucrat. Given the chance, parents tend to pick the best school for their kids. Bad teaches, bad administrators, bad curricula would be run out of the market by better competitors.
you would also further segregate schools and good experienced teachers...there would be a few good schools, because of market forces and the concentration of good teachers, and a lot of very very, bad schools...
spursncowboys
12-03-2009, 09:28 PM
you would also further segregate schools and good experienced teachers...there would be a few good schools, because of market forces and the concentration of good teachers, and a lot of very very, bad schools...
So because some parents are too shitty to actually get involved in their kids education, all the kids have to suffer?
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 09:38 PM
So because some parents are too shitty to actually get involved in their kids education, all the kids have to suffer?
No...you can send your kids to private schools...in TX you can move your kids from low performing schools...but this policy and suburban population creep have diluged good districts with record numbers of new students forcing these districts to hire less experienced, and thus less effecient teachers...
mogrovejo
12-03-2009, 09:42 PM
you would also further segregate schools and good experienced teachers...there would be a few good schools, because of market forces and the concentration of good teachers, and a lot of very very, bad schools...
I think you are confused, you just described the current situation.
How would bad schools survive? It'd be a great opportunity for those currently out of the education business. In a competitive market, suppliers that don't satisfy the consumer don't last long.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 09:49 PM
I think you are confused, you just described the current situation.
How would bad schools survive? It'd be a great opportunity for those currently out of the education business. In a competitive market, suppliers that don't satisfy the consumer don't last long.
Your not gonna pay for that type of system and keep the costs/student where it is sustainable by just property taxes....especially in poorer areas..
..and the rich will supplement any amount they get in vouchers with their own money and attract all the good teachers...everyone else would be SOL..
mogrovejo
12-03-2009, 09:54 PM
Your not gonna pay for that type of system and keep the costs/student where it is sustainable by just property taxes....especially in poorer areas..
Are you sure? Do you know exactly which % of the entire government spending in education is financed with property taxes?
.and the rich will supplement any amount they get in vouchers with their own money and attract all the good teachers...everyone else would be SOL..
Once again, that's what happens now, so I can't really figure out what's your reasoning to say the situation would change for worse. You could always subsidize the riches less, but it wouldn't be needed. Your argument suffers from a common fallacy, the idea that everything under the sun is a zero sum game. Good education providers aren't a finite resource.
jacobdrj
12-03-2009, 10:03 PM
College professors are experts in their fields, and who says $40k-$120k is a lot for a field as competitive as that?
Experts in their fields: Sometimes, perhaps.
But I think the free market has a lot to do with their pay.
You can choose which colleges get your funding, and certain 'brand' colleges are better than others (even if in reality they teach the same things).
jacobdrj
12-03-2009, 10:03 PM
There are lecture classes in college, but there are just as many classes in the same vein as high school. Depends on the college, the course etc.
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 10:04 PM
Are you sure? Do you know exactly which % of the entire government spending in education is financed with property taxes?
Every district has a budget and every district knows exactly how much money they spend in property taxes...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 10:06 PM
Good education providers aren't a finite resource.
In the U.S., good educators are a finite source...it takes a teacher 5 - 10 years to become good teachers...
Nbadan
12-03-2009, 10:09 PM
There are lecture classes in college, but there are just as many classes in the same vein as high school. Depends on the college, the course etc.
Maybe, but almost every college course I've taken is the professor lecturing, maybe doing some problems on the board...that's not the way today's classroom works with NCLB...
Blake
12-04-2009, 01:16 AM
Starting teacher salaries are very competitive with private business, trouble is that you can be teaching for 10+ years and still be in the 40's, compared to a similar private industry job where you could be in the mid $50s, $60 or $70s...that's why there are so many very good certified teachers in TX not teaching...
not necessarily. The starting salary has been steadily climbing, mostly thanks to strong unions and demands for teachers in math/science/ESL.
10+ years ago, starting teacher salaries here in SA were in the upper 20s-low 30s whereas now you can get a gig in the mid 40s.
The thing about it though, that I think you were trying to get at, is that a 20 year vet will only make $12-15k more a year than a starting teacher. There is no real incentive to stay for 20 years other than the retirement and any other benefits that might come with the job.
.....but I'm curious......what similar private industry job do you know of that would pay $50+k for a math/science/english/history or PE teacher?
Blake
12-04-2009, 01:20 AM
correction.....
a 20 year vet will make just less than $8k more per year than a starting teacher:
http://www.nisd.net/hr/compensation/2009-2010%20payscales/TEACHERLIBRARIANNURSE%20WEB%202009.htm
Blake
12-04-2009, 01:43 AM
Parents are a VERY important key, but they aren't just THE key, it really does take a village to raise a child...
what is your definition of village and who brought up the issue of child rearing?
The public schools try to do their part to motivate kids to want to do better, but they shouldn't have to. At the end of the day, the metaphorical kick in the ass has to come from the parent(s).
Blake
12-04-2009, 01:48 AM
Education in this country went way downhill when adults decided that they had to act like everything that every kid does is wonderful. Oh, no- teachers can't put kids into reading groups and every kid has to get a trophy!! The parents are the worse. I have watched them demand that a school quit recognizing the honor roll because it hurts the self-esteem of the kids who don't make it. People have watered down what achievement actually is so that accomplishing something means very little.
Worse than that is apathy.
Blake
12-04-2009, 02:05 AM
...goal setting should be thought at home and reinforced at school...you can't easily teach kids who have never been taught to goal-set to all of the sudden be goal-setters....
the general goals are set by the schools.
the motivation to achieve these goals has to come from home. If there is apathy at home, then chances are there will be apathy in the classroom......no matter how good a motivational speaker the teacher may be.
ploto
12-04-2009, 12:10 PM
You need to turn off the talk radio dude.
I am not a dude and I have never listened to one minute of talk radio. I am, however, a parent with a high-achieving child whose mother sets high standards for him. He knows when he gets praise that it means a real accomplishment and not to create some false sense that he has done some amazing thing simply by doing his homework. No, this does not mean he hears no wonderful things from me; he does all the time, but they are for his effort and his character. He has had friends who parents gave them money for their grades. When he was small, he asked me- what do I get for all my A's? I told him-- you get the self-satisfaction of knowing you worked hard and tried your best. I have seen far too many kids grow up thinking the world would throw lavish praise on them for doing what they are supposed to do. They have a false sense of self that crumbles because it was never based on the truth. Sing if you love it! Sing to the best of your ability! But don't fall apart when the day finally arrives that you realize you were lied to, and, no, you are not the best singer in the world.
ploto
12-04-2009, 12:16 PM
Worse than that is apathy.
On an individual basis it may be worse, for a singular child to have apathetic parents, but overall, when a small number of parents seek to drive down the standards or the sense of real achievement it can hurt everyone. And, of course, you know that in the case I was mentioning, these parents were fine with it when their child made honor roll. It was once little Susie didn't, that it was suddenly unfair and a problem.
TeyshaBlue
12-04-2009, 12:20 PM
I am not a dude and I have never listened to one minute of talk radio. I am, however, a parent with a high-achieving child whose mother sets high standards for him. He knows when he gets praise that it means a real accomplishment and not to create some false sense that he has done some amazing thing simply by doing his homework. No, this does not mean he hears no wonderful things from me; he does all the time, but they are for his effort and his character. He has had friends who parents gave them money for their grades. When he was small, he asked me- what do I get for all my A's? I told him-- you get the self-satisfaction of knowing you worked hard and tried your best. I have seen far too many kids grow up thinking the world would throw lavish praise on them for doing what they are supposed to do. They have a false sense of self that crumbles because it was never based on the truth. Sing if you love it! Sing to the best of your ability! But don't fall apart when the day finally arrives that you realize you were lied to, and, no, you are not the best singer in the world.
If there were a village of parents like you, then it most certainly would not take a village to raise a child. It only takes caring, involved, competent parents.:toast
Nbadan
12-04-2009, 08:25 PM
I am not a dude and I have never listened to one minute of talk radio. I am, however, a parent with a high-achieving child whose mother sets high standards for him. He knows when he gets praise that it means a real accomplishment and not to create some false sense that he has done some amazing thing simply by doing his homework. No, this does not mean he hears no wonderful things from me; he does all the time, but they are for his effort and his character. He has had friends who parents gave them money for their grades. When he was small, he asked me- what do I get for all my A's? I told him-- you get the self-satisfaction of knowing you worked hard and tried your best. I have seen far too many kids grow up thinking the world would throw lavish praise on them for doing what they are supposed to do. They have a false sense of self that crumbles because it was never based on the truth. Sing if you love it! Sing to the best of your ability! But don't fall apart when the day finally arrives that you realize you were lied to, and, no, you are not the best singer in the world.
Kudos to you.....but not every child has a parent like you at home, in fact most disadvantaged kids get very little praise....ever....so why should they do the right thing? I don't know any district that rewards students for simply 'doing homework'...that's the talk radio in you showing again....
Nbadan
12-04-2009, 08:28 PM
On an individual basis it may be worse, for a singular child to have apathetic parents, but overall, when a small number of parents seek to drive down the standards or the sense of real achievement it can hurt everyone. And, of course, you know that in the case I was mentioning, these parents were fine with it when their child made honor roll. It was once little Susie didn't, that it was suddenly unfair and a problem.
Must be a Canadian phenomena because helicopter parents tend to want to raise standards in TX...
Rogue
12-04-2009, 08:31 PM
No. I am fluent in Japanese though.
Funya chin baka ka! Kutabare kusateru oyaji.
pretty fluent, :hat i hope your urine also flows fluently as well, which doesn't sound very practical though given that you've been so fucked up and left a rotting crotch.
Rogue
12-04-2009, 08:35 PM
You really are a fucking idiot :lol
I bet if noone gets pregnant before they are 19, more than 40% of the dropouts we have now would not have dropped out. Maybe even higher.
Alot of Obama dems ask questions but when they get answers they go fucking nuts and say stupid shit like 'birth control is Jacks ultimate solution'. Cynical dumb fucks is what you are. You just want to bitch,feel sorry for yourselves and blame other people who don't have this shitty attitude.
learn how to let your farts make sense son, until then please keep yourself from polluting the air here.
Blake
12-04-2009, 11:55 PM
On an individual basis it may be worse, for a singular child to have apathetic parents, but overall, when a small number of parents seek to drive down the standards or the sense of real achievement it can hurt everyone. And, of course, you know that in the case I was mentioning, these parents were fine with it when their child made honor roll. It was once little Susie didn't, that it was suddenly unfair and a problem.
in this case, if the school or school district caves in to a small number of parents to lower the bar for honor roll, then shame on the school.
F@#K You
12-05-2009, 01:09 PM
kill whites, mexicans, and blacks....... the ones left will send the
US straight back to the top....
Marcus Bryant
12-05-2009, 04:03 PM
There's nothing wrong with public schools. They are performing as designed.
ploto
12-05-2009, 05:35 PM
Must be a Canadian phenomena because helicopter parents tend to want to raise standards in TX...
I live in San Antonio, and helicopter parents do NOT want standards raised. They want their kids coddled and given everything on a silver platter. They fix everything-- even door prize drawings- so that their kids will win!
ploto
12-05-2009, 05:37 PM
in this case, if the school or school district caves in to a small number of parents to lower the bar for honor roll, then shame on the school.
Many have already lowered standards to get into National Honor Society, by not using report card grades, but instead using GPA's with inflated averages generated by adding ridiculous amounts of points for Honors and AP courses. I know of one school that even does Honor Roll in this way.
Nbadan
12-05-2009, 05:54 PM
I live in San Antonio, and helicopter parents do NOT want standards raised. They want their kids coddled and given everything on a silver platter. They fix everything-- even door prize drawings- so that their kids will win!
I've done a lot of research on this topic, and I didn't see too many parents who wanted their kids cuddled...I'm not sure what you mean by 'on a silver platter'...what's on a silver platter? praise? respect?
Nbadan
12-05-2009, 06:01 PM
Many have already lowered standards to get into National Honor Society, by not using report card grades, but instead using GPA's with inflated averages generated by adding ridiculous amounts of points for Honors and AP courses. I know of one school that even does Honor Roll in this way.
What do schools have to do with National Junior Honor Society standards?
Look, there are two type of kids, those who excel in school and those that just want to skate by - the ones who excel can do about any task you challenge them with as long as its within practical limits, while the skaters will always do just enough to get by...I'm sure everyone on this board can relate...
ploto
12-05-2009, 07:55 PM
What do schools have to do with National Honor Society standards?
The standard of the National Honor Society is that a student must have an A average. It used to be that all schools interpreted this to mean that averaging the grades on the student's report card, it equaled an average higher than 90 or whatever the standard for an A was at that school. Tdoay, some schools do not calculate the average in that manner so that more kids can "qualify." They use their GPA, to which schools add more and more points all the time to raise the student's average. For example, if you get an 85 it used to count as an 85 when a school averaged your grades to see if you met the standard for NHS. Now, some schools add those points- some as many as 10 points for an honors class- so that they count a 95 in calculating your average for NHS. It used to be that the GPA was only for class ranking and not to determine if a person qualifies for NHS or not.
spursncowboys
12-05-2009, 07:58 PM
nbadan: what research?
ploto
12-05-2009, 07:58 PM
I've done a lot of research on this topic, and I didn't see too many parents who wanted their kids cuddled...I'm not sure what you mean by 'on a silver platter'...what's on a silver platter? praise? respect?
coddled--treated indulgently
on a silver platter-- handed to them without the necessary work or effort
You can research all you want, but I watch parents do it every single day.
Nbadan
12-05-2009, 08:10 PM
coddled--treated indulgently
on a silver platter-- handed to them without the necessary work or effort
You can research all you want, but I watch parents do it every single day.
Are you a teacher or administrator?
Nbadan
12-05-2009, 08:13 PM
coddled--treated indulgently
I'm not sure what kinda schools you've seen, but generally Principals don't have the money or time to 'cuddle students'... there are BIPs that everyone agrees to follow, but cuddling isn't one of the procedures..
Nbadan
12-05-2009, 08:14 PM
nbadan: what research?
Years of research....and many more too go..
Wild Cobra
12-05-2009, 11:48 PM
correction.....
a 20 year vet will make just less than $8k more per year than a starting teacher:
http://www.nisd.net/hr/compensation/2009-2010%20payscales/TEACHERLIBRARIANNURSE%20WEB%202009.htm
Those are pretty good wage scales for the lowest common denominator of each education level, especially since they work just less than 9 months a years. Bottom on the scale is $30+ per hour.
Maybe the pay scale should be by merit and reviews instead of education level and time in the field.
Nbadan
12-06-2009, 04:13 AM
Those are pretty good wage scales for the lowest common denominator of each education level, especially since they work just less than 9 months a years. Bottom on the scale is $30+ per hour.
Maybe the pay scale should be by merit and reviews instead of education level and time in the field.
Every teacher gets reviewed twice a year....education is the only field where you must re-apply for your job every year...
Blake
12-06-2009, 06:08 AM
The standard of the National Honor Society is that a student must have an A average. It used to be that all schools interpreted this to mean that averaging the grades on the student's report card, it equaled an average higher than 90 or whatever the standard for an A was at that school. Tdoay, some schools do not calculate the average in that manner so that more kids can "qualify." They use their GPA, to which schools add more and more points all the time to raise the student's average. For example, if you get an 85 it used to count as an 85 when a school averaged your grades to see if you met the standard for NHS. Now, some schools add those points- some as many as 10 points for an honors class- so that they count a 95 in calculating your average for NHS. It used to be that the GPA was only for class ranking and not to determine if a person qualifies for NHS or not.
that's not the same thing as giving every kid a participation trophy just for playing the game.
If schools are raising kids averages on the whole, then it's definitely not anything more than to show off how good the school is performing.
Blake
12-06-2009, 06:12 AM
coddled--treated indulgently
on a silver platter-- handed to them without the necessary work or effort
You can research all you want, but I watch parents do it every single day.
I don't see it from what my wife tells me, but then again, she works in a poorer school district. I would expect the silver platter treatment in a rich district or especially a private school.
Blake
12-06-2009, 06:18 AM
Those are pretty good wage scales for the lowest common denominator of each education level, especially since they work just less than 9 months a years. Bottom on the scale is $30+ per hour.
It's a very good starting salary for a bachelor's degree. It's just not much more than starting pay even if you are a 20 year vet.
Maybe the pay scale should be by merit and reviews instead of education level and time in the field.
Obama would agree.
I would agree to an extent, but based on the current pay scale, the reward for doing a great job would still be minimal.
Nbadan
12-06-2009, 03:19 PM
It's a very good starting salary for a bachelor's degree. It's just not much more than starting pay even if you are a 20 year vet
..and that right there is the real issue....starting pay is good, but as teachers get better they need to be payed more, especially in poorer districts because 1.) they are better teachers and in greater demand 2.) They have to deal with many more personal issues with students than in more affluent districts 3.) they have to create a curriculum that works for their schools...
Nbadan
12-06-2009, 03:24 PM
Obama would agree.
I would agree to an extent, but based on the current pay scale, the reward for doing a great job would still be minimal.
Exactly. If starting pay in $43K then average pay should go up $2-3K per year until a teacher tops out at about $70K...also, there needs to be long-term health-care for teachers after they retire...this is also why many good teachers leave the field....they need to work at least 5 years outside of education to re-qualify for Social Security..
mogrovejo
12-07-2009, 11:17 PM
Every district has a budget and every district knows exactly how much money they spend in property taxes...
That's fine, but is that supposed to be the answer to my question?
In the U.S., good educators are a finite source...it takes a teacher 5 - 10 years to become good teachers...
I think you don't know the meaning of "finite resource". What's exactly the threshold that limits good education providers in the US? I'm not even sure if demographic issues apply, it's always possible to import them.
TeyshaBlue
12-07-2009, 11:20 PM
Exactly. If starting pay in $43K then average pay should go up $2-3K per year until a teacher tops out at about $70K...also, there needs to be long-term health-care for teachers after they retire...this is also why many good teachers leave the field....they need to work at least 5 years outside of education to re-qualify for Social Security..
In Texas, teachers contribute to a retirement pension fund...so they're not totally unfunded in retirement.
Nbadan
12-07-2009, 11:29 PM
In Texas, teachers contribute to a retirement pension fund...so they're not totally unfunded in retirement.
.....yes, but there is no health-care...
Nbadan
12-07-2009, 11:30 PM
That's fine, but is that supposed to be the answer to my question?
Yes, they are public record...
Nbadan
12-07-2009, 11:32 PM
I think you don't know the meaning of "finite resource". What's exactly the threshold that limits good education providers in the US? I'm not even sure if demographic issues apply, it's always possible to import them.
you seriously want to put foreign teachers in with American students
:lmao
TeyshaBlue
12-07-2009, 11:40 PM
you seriously want to put foreign teachers in with American students
:lmao
We're already doing it, dan.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/06/eveningnews/main1689748.shtml
TeyshaBlue
12-07-2009, 11:41 PM
.....yes, but there is no health-care...
true dat. I'm not sure if they would still qualify for medicare or not.
mogrovejo
12-07-2009, 11:50 PM
Yes, they are public record...
Okay, this was my question:
Do you know exactly which % of the entire government spending in education is financed with property taxes?
This was your answer:
Every district has a budget and every district knows exactly how much money they spend in property taxes...
What am I missing here?
you seriously want to put foreign teachers in with American students
:lmao
Well, it's not like that doesn't happen already, but that was not the point, you probably misread. I was just saying that the only way I could see good education providers being a finite resource would be by implying a demographic limitation - something that would make no sense, as you understand - but that even that argument would be faulty.
I sincerely don't see how good education can be seen as a finite resource. Do you care to explain what is the limit?
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:03 AM
We're already doing it, dan.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/06/eveningnews/main1689748.shtml
I don't know if they've actually done it, and the article doesn't say, but just the legal ramifications for putting a recent immigrant in with school kids have got to be tremendous...what if said immigrant molest kids and flees back to Malaysia? Seriously?
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:04 AM
true dat. I'm not sure if they would still qualify for medicare or not.
That's why they work 5 years out of teaching....5 very productive years...
TeyshaBlue
12-08-2009, 12:07 AM
That's why they work 5 years out of teaching....5 very productive years...
Ahhh...ok then. You'd think I would know the answer to that. I taught for 10 years. :downspin:
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:09 AM
Do you know exactly which % of the entire government spending in education is financed with property taxes?
This was your answer:
Every district has a budget and every district knows exactly how much money they spend in property taxes.
My bad...
TeyshaBlue
12-08-2009, 12:09 AM
I don't know if they've actually done it, and the article doesn't say, but just the legal ramifications for putting a recent immigrant in with school kids have got to be tremendous...what if said immigrant molest kids and flees back to Malaysia? Seriously?
Google is your friend. There's a ton of links chock full of examples. I just pulled down a quick one. I remember when Dallas ISD was recruiting teachers from Mexico to teach in their ESL program. It wasn't that long ago.
I haven't a clue as to how an immigrant teacher is held responsible for their actions....pretty much the same as a regular immigrant I guess.
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:13 AM
Google is your friend. There's a ton of links chock full of examples. I just pulled down a quick one. I remember when Dallas ISD was recruiting teachers from Mexico to teach in their ESL program. It wasn't that long ago.
Well I can tell you that school districts in Houston and Dallas are in high need, so even if you brought some immigrants in, and those numbers would be very minimal for many reasons, it wouldn't make a dent in teacher pay in TX or the need for more experienced teachers....
TeyshaBlue
12-08-2009, 12:14 AM
Well I can tell you that school districts in Houston and Dallas are in high need, so even if you brought some immigrants in, and those numbers would be very minimal for many reasons, it wouldn't make a dent in teacher pay in TX or the need for more experienced teachers....
Agreed....
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:17 AM
Ahhh...ok then. You'd think I would know the answer to that. I taught for 10 years. :downspin:
Starting pay for teachers is OK, but tenure salaries need to reflect a teacher's experience and efficiency...a experienced teacher is 3-5x as valuable as a new teacher..
ploto
12-08-2009, 12:20 AM
that's not the same thing as giving every kid a participation trophy just for playing the game.
Actually, it is worse. With the trophy for participating, it is made clear that this is all it is for. The other leads kids to believe they have accomplished something that they really have not, in my view. It waters down the standard and cheapens its value.
Nbadan
12-08-2009, 12:30 AM
Actually, it is worse. With the trophy for participating, it is made clear that this is all it is for. The other leads kids to believe they have accomplished something that they really have not, in my view. It waters down the standard and cheapens its value.
I've never seen that as an issue...of all the issues affecting education, and all the problems, lowering standards because Jimmy needs to be cuddled doesn't even make the top 10 list...
The competition is fierce in better high schools to get into that top 10 percent...
Blake
12-08-2009, 02:55 PM
I've never seen that as an issue...of all the issues affecting education, and all the problems, lowering standards because Jimmy needs to be cuddled doesn't even make the top 10 list...
The competition is fierce in better high schools to get into that top 10 percent...
from what I've seen, this is the case....
....and if schools are somehow lowering standards, it's not because they are coddling Jimmy or trying to appease his parents.......
it's because the school or the school district needs to meet certain standards for reasons such as receiving funding of some type or avoiding being hit with probation or possible closure.
CharlieMac
12-09-2009, 08:29 PM
I teach and even I can't say what the fix is.
Let's not kid ourselves though, schools lower standards because of parent pressure. Certain low income schools lower standards so that we do not lose students to other districts. It's just a sad fact. Less students means less funding. The more special ed. students we take, the more funding we get. To bad school districts don't use that money to hire more special ed teachers.
Sad fact, and this happens in more than one district, many schools have done away wish assigning a grade lower than a 50. If a student does nothing and the teacher assigns a grade of 0, the grading system automatically bumps it up to a 50 or a 60 in a few cases. (modifications) Now how long do you think it took for teh students to figure this out? They show up the last two weeks of class and do a bunch of make up work and they have a 70 easily.
Teachers that hold students accountable are definitely called in for a conference with adminsitration to fix those failure rates. A teacher will be asked repeatedly what they can do to assist the students in passing until the point is made. Make no mistake about it, those failure rates will be fixed.
In many instances parents can request AP classes for student. The same students that fail TAKS.
Also, it hasn't taken freshmen students long to figure out that they can fail the TAKS test with out having to pay for it. It's not required at that grade level to advance to the next grade.
Sooooo many things wrong.
Someone mentioned earlier that there are bad teachers out there that are collecting a paycheck and that's it. Name one profession where that doesn't happen.
Yonivore
12-09-2009, 08:47 PM
1) Lift the mandate of attending school. If a kid doesn't want to be there, I don't want him there either. Most of those that would be truants are just causing trouble for those that are in school to learn.
2) Abolish the U. S. Department of Education.
3) Disband the National Education Association.
4) Re-emphasize trade and vocational education in high school again.
5) Bring back corporal punishment.
6) Pay teachers based on performance.
7) Do away with special detention schools. If they misbehave, give 'em Saturday detention, suspend, or expel. Let their parents worry about their future.
There. That'd be a good start.
Other things would be to discontinue all the nonsense social engineering programs and remove junk food from all campuses. But, those are local decisions.
spursncowboys
12-09-2009, 08:51 PM
I teach and even I can't say what the fix is.
Let's not kid ourselves though, schools lower standards because of parent pressure. Certain low income schools lower standards so that we do not lose students to other districts. It's just a sad fact. Less students means less funding. The more special ed. students we take, the more funding we get. To bad school districts don't use that money to hire more special ed teachers.
Sad fact, and this happens in more than one district, many schools have done away wish assigning a grade lower than a 50. If a student does nothing and the teacher assigns a grade of 0, the grading system automatically bumps it up to a 50 or a 60 in a few cases. (modifications) Now how long do you think it took for teh students to figure this out? They show up the last two weeks of class and do a bunch of make up work and they have a 70 easily.
Teachers that hold students accountable are definitely called in for a conference with adminsitration to fix those failure rates. A teacher will be asked repeatedly what they can do to assist the students in passing until the point is made. Make no mistake about it, those failure rates will be fixed.
In many instances parents can request AP classes for student. The same students that fail TAKS.
Also, it hasn't taken freshmen students long to figure out that they can fail the TAKS test with out having to pay for it. It's not required at that grade level to advance to the next grade.
Sooooo many things wrong.
Someone mentioned earlier that there are bad teachers out there that are collecting a paycheck and that's it. Name one profession where that doesn't happen.
Great points. You seeing first hand, are the testing creating a bigger problem or have they been a good indicator? Also without saying exactly what school or district, can you describe the type of school -middle class students, rural, new, etc.
spursncowboys
12-09-2009, 08:54 PM
1) Lift the mandate of attending school. If a kid doesn't want to be there, I don't want him there either. Most of those that would be truants are just causing trouble for those that are in school to learn.
2) Abolish the U. S. Department of Education.
3) Disband the National Education Association.
4) Re-emphasize trade and vocational education in high school again.
5) Bring back corporal punishment.
6) Pay teachers based on performance.
7) Do away with special detention schools. If they misbehave, give 'em Saturday detention, suspend, or expel. Let their parents worry about their future.
There. That'd be a good start.
Other things would be to discontinue all the nonsense social engineering programs and remove junk food from all campuses. But, those are local decisions.
WIth regards to one, it is our responsibility to make kids go to school. One it keeps them from criminalizing the community while most people are working and it benefits everyone. I have no problem putting kids who don't want to be in school, in different atmospheres (positive and negative) for learning. All except seven are great ideas.
Yonivore
12-09-2009, 08:58 PM
WIth regards to one, it is our responsibility to make kids go to school.
I disagree. It is a parent's responsibility to make a kid go to school.
One it keeps them from criminalizing the community while most people are working and it benefits everyone.
They criminalize the school instead. I have a bigger problem with that.
I have no problem putting kids who don't want to be in school, in different atmospheres (positive and negative) for learning.
As long as I don't have to pay for the different atmosphere, I'm cool with that.
All except seven are great ideas.
We'll just have to agree to disagree then.
CharlieMac
12-09-2009, 09:09 PM
Great points. You seeing first hand, are the testing creating a bigger problem or have they been a good indicator? Also without saying exactly what school or district, can you describe the type of school -middle class students, rural, new, etc.
I teach English. We had an exceptionally high passing rate with the TAKS last year. Our reward for that? Having our support (co-teachers to work with special ed students) moved to departments with high failure rates (math). Also, losing a teacher and having them moved to another dept as well thus increasing class size.
The school I work in is in a very poor area. High drop out rate, high pregnancy rate, and maybe 5% white.
The TAKS test is a good indicator of what should be learned. The problem is the curriculum at times. That hurts the kids more than anything. For example, we are supposed to be teaching To Kill a Mockingbird. Thats well and good except we have students at a 5th grade reading level. We are also expected to squeeze that in during mocks simulation week. I don't know about math and other areas, but the TAKS test is not very difficult. Released versions of past TAKS test do wonders to prepare students.
What kills, and I know it's cliche, is the politics involved in education and the lack of parental involvement. It's hard to discipline a child when their parent runs through Pocket or Cricket phone numbers and they flat out ask us to deal with them when you do get a hold of a parent.
CharlieMac
12-09-2009, 09:18 PM
1) Lift the mandate of attending school. If a kid doesn't want to be there, I don't want him there either. Most of those that would be truants are just causing trouble for those that are in school to learn.
2) Abolish the U. S. Department of Education.
3) Disband the National Education Association.
4) Re-emphasize trade and vocational education in high school again.
5) Bring back corporal punishment.
6) Pay teachers based on performance.
7) Do away with special detention schools. If they misbehave, give 'em Saturday detention, suspend, or expel. Let their parents worry about their future.
There. That'd be a good start.
Other things would be to discontinue all the nonsense social engineering programs and remove junk food from all campuses. But, those are local decisions.
You have a few good points but you're thinking of a perfect world. If that mandate is lifted, then what's the motivation. You forget what puberty does to a childs brain. They can't see past 15 minutes into the future and they definitely can't anticipate the outcome of being a high school drop out.
What's going to be the point of abolishing the US Dept of Ed? I've heard a few idiots mention that they'd like to nationalize these standards but some sort of beaurocracy needs to remain in place. God that pains me to say.
Trade and vocational schools definitely need to make a strong comeback. It's a fact that not every child is college material.
I'd kill for corporal punishment to come back. But at the same time I cringe at the thought of someone putiing their hands on my son one day. I think maybe it could come back on some level just as long as it remains that ONLY and administrator could punish the child in teh presence of one other administrator and a teacher. Students are lost in middle school for this simple reason. They have no fear and KNOW they are untouchable. hell we can't even have a child write lines, stand in the corner or place their desk outside of class anymore.
You simply cannot pay a teacher based on performance. too many factors involved (TAKS modifications, behavioral implementations, school resources, etc) for this to ever be fair. And to be honest, some years you just have a group of kids that are flat out not the brightest. Luck of the draw some years.
I know my typing is shit but once that bell rings I could care less about editing and so on...
Nbadan
12-09-2009, 09:22 PM
from what I've seen, this is the case....
....and if schools are somehow lowering standards, it's not because they are coddling Jimmy or trying to appease his parents.......
it's because the school or the school district needs to meet certain standards for reasons such as receiving funding of some type or avoiding being hit with probation or possible closure.
Schools are gonna get funded either way...the state will simply step in, regulate the school and the district....the only districts closing schools are those in contrition.
Yonivore
12-09-2009, 09:41 PM
You have a few good points but you're thinking of a perfect world. If that mandate is lifted, then what's the motivation. You forget what puberty does to a childs brain. They can't see past 15 minutes into the future and they definitely can't anticipate the outcome of being a high school drop out.
We've had high school dropouts in the past and, still, managed to populate positions at N.A.S.A. You don't give teens enough credit. Most have goals and ambitions and realize an education is going to be a part of attaining those.
What's going to be the point of abolishing the US Dept of Ed? I've heard a few idiots mention that they'd like to nationalize these standards but some sort of beaurocracy needs to remain in place. God that pains me to say.
Sever the tie between the federal government and the local school. That's the point.
Trade and vocational schools definitely need to make a strong comeback. It's a fact that not every child is college material.
Glad we agree.
I'd kill for corporal punishment to come back. But at the same time I cringe at the thought of someone putiing their hands on my son one day. I think maybe it could come back on some level just as long as it remains that ONLY and administrator could punish the child in teh presence of one other administrator and a teacher. Students are lost in middle school for this simple reason. They have no fear and KNOW they are untouchable. hell we can't even have a child write lines, stand in the corner or place their desk outside of class anymore.
Yep. I agree.
You simply cannot pay a teacher based on performance. too many factors involved (TAKS modifications, behavioral implementations, school resources, etc) for this to ever be fair. And to be honest, some years you just have a group of kids that are flat out not the brightest. Luck of the draw some years.
Screw TAKS, and well, if you have that kind of "luck of the draw" year after year after year, maybe it's not luck of the draw. I should have expanded on that point somewhat in that I would also give teachers more control over who is in their classroom to be taught.
I know my typing is shit but once that bell rings I could care less about editing and so on...
No worries.
jacobdrj
12-10-2009, 01:29 AM
1) Lift the mandate of attending school. If a kid doesn't want to be there, I don't want him there either. Most of those that would be truants are just causing trouble for those that are in school to learn.
2) Abolish the U. S. Department of Education.
3) Disband the National Education Association.
4) Re-emphasize trade and vocational education in high school again.
5) Bring back corporal punishment.
6) Pay teachers based on performance.
7) Do away with special detention schools. If they misbehave, give 'em Saturday detention, suspend, or expel. Let their parents worry about their future.
There. That'd be a good start.
Other things would be to discontinue all the nonsense social engineering programs and remove junk food from all campuses. But, those are local decisions.
I am starting to agree more and more with #1. It is a big discussion among my (fairly conservative) circle of friends, and seems to make a bit of sense.
I am not sure what difference #2/#3 makes. The state governments have been fairly effective at resisting federal interference for quite a while, for better or for worse. Third party organizations have been well-resisted as well.
#4 seems obvious. I have no idea why trades are not emphasized in the US.
#5 is inconsistent with #1 Yonivore. If you are dealing with kids who want to be there, or even parents who want their kids to be there, there should be no place for this. It is the parents job to deal with this as they see fit, not a teacher or principal.
#6 sounds good, but how do you grade this? Interview all the students? What if in the student interviews, the kids just like the teacher because they are nice or gives easy grades? What if the kids hate the teacher and they all fail the class, or hate the teacher and all pass the class? Or, would you look to see future success of the students after they graduate from that teachers' class? Would you test the students on that subject with a standardized test? How would you have a standardized test without some government program, or some master private corporate monopoly/accreditation? Do you go by grades? What if the teacher just gives A's? What if the teacher gives F's, but the students all pass standardized tests?
Yonivore, could you explain #7? I don't know what special detention is.
jacobdrj
12-11-2009, 02:23 PM
There is a top ranked public school here in the metro Detroit area that may close down soon. Apparently it costs $9000 a head in that particular institution. That is $3000 more than the charter school I went to cost per head back in 2000. With Michigan's economy going to shit, there isn't enough funding anymore to sustain this academy.
2 things I gather from this situation: a)Money thrown at the situation can actually help, at least sometimes. b) Public school failure, as I define it, can occur to an extent.
This is coming on the heals of the reading disaster the DPS (Detroit Public Schools) have put fourth, placing dead last. They have a 30 million dollar deficit to contend with. All while the person brought in to 'fix' the situation is turning down free county services in favor of city autonomy.
Winehole23
12-11-2009, 03:29 PM
All while the person brought in to 'fix' the situation is turning down free county services in favor of city autonomy.Who, please?
Winehole23
12-11-2009, 03:39 PM
Let me preface this by saying I'm not claiming that teachers are or are not adequately paid for the work that they do. But the theory that students will perform better if we give the teachers more money gets tried every time the state legislature meets and it never works. IIRC, when Bush was governor Texas passed the largest teacher pay increase in state history and where did it get us? I won't argue with anyone who says that teachers deserve more money, but if the conversation is how to get the kids a better education then simply giving the teachers more money is a concept that has a proven track record of failure.That's why we need to get rid of the schools altogether, and start off fresh, instead of continuing to augment and sustain the beast. The public school system needs to be shut down entirely.
The sooner the better IMO. Over time it will become even more unaffordable than it is now.
Nbadan
12-11-2009, 03:40 PM
Sad fact, and this happens in more than one district, many schools have done away wish assigning a grade lower than a 50. If a student does nothing and the teacher assigns a grade of 0, the grading system automatically bumps it up to a 50 or a 60 in a few cases. (modifications) Now how long do you think it took for teh students to figure this out? They show up the last two weeks of class and do a bunch of make up work and they have a 70 easily.
you know....that's illegal now in TX.....however, a student who gets less than a 50 on a exam might as well give up for the semester, so the curve is for a reason...the student is still failing, but at least he still has a chance...that said, if a kid gets less than a 50 on a exam the teacher should allow him to retake the test or do make-up work...
Nbadan
12-11-2009, 03:42 PM
Also, it hasn't taken freshmen students long to figure out that they can fail the TAKS test with out having to pay for it. It's not required at that grade level to advance to the next grade.
There is a very strong correlation though and students must be made to understand this...it's a pattern...
Blake
12-11-2009, 03:47 PM
you know....that's illegal now in TX.....however, a student who gets less than a 50 on a exam might as well give up for the semester, so the curve is for a reason...the student is still failing, but at least he still has a chance...that said, if a kid gets less than a 50 on a exam the teacher should allow him to retake the test or do make-up work...
last year at my wife's school, no student was allowed to fail in the 1st 9 weeks of the year no matter what their grade really was.
I think the teacher should allow the kid to do make up work that might bump him/her up to a passing grade........but if the teacher wants to leave the kid at a 50, it's definitely justifiable to do so.
Nbadan
12-11-2009, 03:50 PM
They criminalize the school instead. I have a bigger problem with that.
I've advocated military type school were the kids headed down the wrong direction are thought concepts like self-discipline, ethics, honor and perseverance through physical work and community service for half a day...and then thought reading/math/science/social studies for half a day..
...if a kid has that, he's gonna make it...
Nbadan
12-11-2009, 03:53 PM
last year at my wife's school, no student was allowed to fail in the 1st 9 weeks of the year no matter what their grade really was.
I think the teacher should allow the kid to do make up work that might bump him/her up to a passing grade........but if the teacher wants to leave the kid at a 50, it's definitely justifiable to do so.
Certainly up to the teacher's discretion, just serves very little purpose to fail a kid really, really, bad....the kid gives up and turns into a discipline issue and a slow regressive pattern begins...
Blake
12-11-2009, 03:58 PM
Certainly up to the teacher's discretion, just serves very little purpose to fail a kid really, really, bad....the kid gives up and turns into a discipline issue and a slow regressive pattern begins...
...to which that kid has no business even being in a Spanish classroom then.
It's why I am all for trade school for the kids that cannot handle high school arts and science classes.
admiralsnackbar
12-11-2009, 06:04 PM
I took the afternoon off and got stuck thinking about this, and now I suddenly have this florid, long-ass sumbitch. Apologies in advance.
So one of the greatest impediments in the road to a successful educational policy is the same thing that makes us a great country: our diversity. Special interest groups are constantly trying to bend the curriculum to their ends. Some liberals advocate educational environments in which the student's self esteem is more valuable than the education she receives, such that lesson plans should cater to the lowest common denominators in classrooms, reflect their ethnic, spiritual, and sexual diversities, suppress or ignore human failings (like racism or sexism in Shakespeare, say) and above all, promote inclusion. Some conservatives argue for biblical education, excision of theologically controversial scientific principles and morally dubious materials (like drinking and sex in Shakespeare), and focus on orthodox uniformity. And beyond these ideological factions, there are all the minorities that want to at the very least limit institutional discrimination against them. In the end, then, teachers are left with very little anybody can agree on, and this pre-masticated, culturally relativistic cud is what we pass off as a curriculum.
IMO, the way around all this bullshit is to stop thinking about education as a thing which ignores our similarities for the purpose of down-playing our differences. What do we ultimately all have in common as Americans? This: the fact that we're Americans, that we are the products of a document which is the culmination of a long historical conversation over the course of 2K years. To understand this conversation, you have to start at the beginning, with the Greeks, with the Greek language, with Euclidian geometry and Aristotelian naturalism and Platonic idealism and Homeric poetry. From there the conversation develops, moves to Rome, to Jerusalem, to France, to Germany, etc. You see theology influence philosophy influence poetry influence science influence mathematics and crosswise, from the way-way back and up to the present day. You don't have to sweat that you're being indoctrinated by, say, a theological tractatus, because it is never presented as a Truth, just as a de-politicized historical artifact for you to consider.
I honestly think if you can make people understand how they came to be Americans, why the conversation of history made them a necessary, living response to that conversation, you are not only giving them a strong classical education and teaching them to think, you're unifying them, and protecting them from the disconnectedness that is a necessary consequence of living in a country so slanted towards individualism that it has no perceptible national character in itself.
It all sounds idealistic and un-doable, I know, but it works. I know, because -- Sy Sperling full disclosure moment -- I went to a college that had just such a program.
Maybe most surprising is that I don't think the curriculum there was beyond anything your average high school student could manage, especially since the format is informal and students are encouraged to make sense of the material for themselves, then just share their opinions with their classmates, the way we all do here when we bullshit about whatever we're bullshitting about. As the kids start getting interested in the material and competing with each other, they kinda start to teach one another and keep each other on point. The teachers begin to melt into the periphery, serving only to guide the conversation. It's kind of like teaching how to put together an internal combustion engine by tracing its inventor's train of thought and process of construction instead of reading a science manual that just shows you a bloodless schematic of its construction.
So that's my college prep track.
At the same time, Judge Smails douchey contention that "the world needs ditch-diggers, too," is sadly true, and I think that for those who don't have the wherewithal or interest to study this way as college prep, we need to have a much more extensive vocational program in place. And since I suspect it's kids who struggle with academics and fall into vocational studies that are likely the ones with the highest drop-out risk, I think they should be paid for the work they do in their classes, be it repairing teacher's cars or computers, building furniture, ROTC drilling, or whatever work-study their chosen specialization may call for. People can bitch about the added cost, but on of my dad's favorite sayings is that the most valuable resource of a nation are it's children, and that rings true, I think. If a kid stays in school and develops a skill, that means he will be more likely to become a property owner and, as such, less likely to be a criminal or junky.
I also believe in magnet schools for kids with natural skill sets: PVA's and Health and Science magnets are common enough, but globalization will put a premium on multi-culty polyglots, so how about linguistic magnet schools that feed into Foreign Service and International Biz jobs?
Alright... I'm done yapping. Sorry again :D
jacobdrj
12-12-2009, 01:30 AM
Who, please?
I kid you not. His name is Robert Bobb...
http://blog.mlive.com/news/detroit_impact/2009/04/090429-robert-bobb-detroit.jpg
CharlieMac
12-12-2009, 07:35 PM
you know....that's illegal now in TX.....however, a student who gets less than a 50 on a exam might as well give up for the semester, so the curve is for a reason...the student is still failing, but at least he still has a chance...that said, if a kid gets less than a 50 on a exam the teacher should allow him to retake the test or do make-up work...
You're assuming kids show up bright-eyed and ready to learn. Kids failing with constant zeroes do not want make up work. They do not want Saturday school, and they certainly do not want any type of help.
I'm assigning 3 grades per week to ensure every student who has an off day and is having a case of the grumpies due to puberty can still easily make up the work and pass a class.
It's not illegal, a law just passed to do away with the mandate that ALL teachers must assign a 50. We can still be nudged into assigning a 50 ourselves. Slippery slope though for faculty for a few reasons. We WILL be called in to pretty much be scolded for a high failure rate. We will be asked by numerous administrators what modifications are being made along with what interventions are being made as well. This is a part of our job which we fully understand. Problem arises when certain students NEED to be tested for special ed., moved into a lower level reading class, etc. and they have a grade of 70 which is nowhere near an accurate assessment of where they are academically. Also, come TAKS time red flags are raised on a teacher for having low TAKS scores with high passing rates. That's a boat we all avoid trying to be in.
I realize on the outside it seems like every student should be given a chance. Before I started teaching, that sounded great. But with some students we NEED to document their lack of effort, TRUE test score and so on. Some students should flat out be in alternative school or fail but it's so hard to do so now. Hell, right now I have to submit so much paperwork to deny a student credit with 30 absences (and he refuses to do Saturday school) yet he has an 80 in the class. Because I offer so much make-up work 7 weeks after it was due he is in great shape. By no means is that fair to the average student with 2 absences, does work on time and yet he's pulling an 80 as well.
Like I said, just because that mandate was done away with doesn't mean it's not being implied when I meet up with my 5 bosses.
You know what has the greatest effect on a student? Seriously, letting them drop out. They come back months later bored out of their minds and so sick of work. They've grown up in every sense when they come back.
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 08:17 AM
Kevin Jones suggests the public schools aren't broken (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/08/kids-school-test-scores-charts-kevin-drum).
coyotes_geek
08-24-2012, 08:27 AM
This was an interesting idea I heard a while back from some expert on the radio. Separate classrooms for boys and girls. Theory being that it would help classroom discussion because boys don't want to look stupid in front of girls and girls don't want to look too smart in front of boys. Not sure how true that is, but I thought it was an interesting theory.
Austin ISD currently mulling over the idea of trying this at a couple of low performing schools....
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 08:27 AM
Kevin Jones suggests the public schools aren't broken (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/08/kids-school-test-scores-charts-kevin-drum).
ALL public schools ARE NOT BROKEN. The decently and well financed ones, even with the conservative-hated unionized teachers, do well, even wonderfully, with well above avg graduation rates and college acceptances. Conservatives can't explain that, cognitive dissonance.
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 08:31 AM
how would you explain the striking lack of measurable progress at the 17 year old level, given the dramatic increase in money expended for public education?
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 08:38 AM
"dramatic increase in money expended for public education"
got any dramatic numbers?
and exactly where was the alleged money spent?
the VRWC doesn't give a shit about education, they only want taxpayers' school funds transferred to for-profit dumbed-down, "Christian indoctrination" charters, which so far have not succeeded in getting students better results.
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 08:44 AM
got any dramatic numbers?sure, man. about 3-4x more per head since 1960.
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 08:45 AM
a lot more is spent on the administrative layer than educators. that's been the historical trend, anyway.
coyotes_geek
08-24-2012, 08:51 AM
http://www.fastexas.org/study/images/ex5.png
63% increase in school district expenditures per student between 98-99 and 08-09. I wonder if the quality of education the students received during this period increased by a comprable percentage?
leemajors
08-24-2012, 09:33 AM
Kevin Jones suggests the public schools aren't broken (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/08/kids-school-test-scores-charts-kevin-drum).
Drum
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 09:37 AM
http://www.fastexas.org/study/images/ex5.png
63% increase in school district expenditures per student between 98-99 and 08-09. I wonder if the quality of education the students received during this period increased by a comprable percentage?
So you can see why VRWC wants to get their greedy, predatory hands on those $100Bs.
The overall increase is spending doesn't explain why many schools get excellent results while many schools simply fail. The only results the privatizing VRWC care about is pocketing as much of those $Bs as they can scam.
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 09:38 AM
Drum:lol
thanks. I see what I did there.
Winehole23
08-24-2012, 09:39 AM
So you can see why VRWC wants to get their greedy, predatory hands on those $100Bs.
The overall increase is spending doesn't explain why many schools get excellent results while many schools simply fail. The only results the privatizing VRWC care about is pocketing as much of those $Bs as they can scam.yeah, that's what the state sponsored vouchers in Indiana are all about. :rolleyes
TeyshaBlue
08-24-2012, 09:48 AM
yeah, that's what the state sponsored vouchers in Indiana are all about. :rolleyes
:lol smh
coyotes_geek
08-24-2012, 10:09 AM
So you can see why VRWC wants to get their greedy, predatory hands on those $100Bs.
The overall increase is spending doesn't explain why many schools get excellent results while many schools simply fail. The only results the privatizing VRWC care about is pocketing as much of those $Bs as they can scam.
We get it. You're more interested in protecting the government's monopoly on taxpayer education dollars than you are in ensuring that every child has access to a quality education. So long as the public schools in the suburbs are giving quality educations to the white kids, that should be good enough for everyone else. Heaven forbid a poor minority stuck in a failing public school be given an alternative. That could just ruin everything.
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 10:23 AM
We get it. You're more interested in protecting the government's monopoly on taxpayer education dollars than you are in ensuring that every child has access to a quality education. So long as the public schools in the suburbs are giving quality educations to the white kids, that should be good enough for everyone else. Heaven forbid a poor minority stuck in a failing public school be given an alternative. That could just ruin everything.
lots of red herrings and straw men
There is no monopoly.
If parents want to spend their education money on a private school, as they've done for many decades, they can.
lack of dollars for schools in poor districts is not the only reason those schools fail. It's well known black and Hispanic culture, in general, doesn't put as much value on education as Asian and middle class Euro-Americans. (and save me the fucking anecdotes and exceptions, please). Combined with parents, often single parents, working in shitty jobs for shitty wages, it's fatal.
I can guarantee you reason VRWC/ALEC is pushing so hard to destroy public schools isn't to get their hands on small funds for underprivileged kids in underfunded schools.
They want the taxpayer dollars of middle class parents in funded districts transferred to for-profit non-unionized charters, and, above, to bust the teachers' union as a source Democratic/democratic funding.
VRWC/ALEC doesn't give a shit about education outcomes.
TeyshaBlue
08-24-2012, 10:31 AM
Talking point nonsense.
There is no meaningful way you can document or validate manufactured "intent". The lazy guarantee you offer is meaningless.
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 10:35 AM
ALEC, financed by the VRWC has written "suggestions" and has been taken up by Repug legislatures everywhere. ALEC's language appears, often verbatim if not paraphrased, in may Repug bills and amendments.
fuck you and your willfully ignorant nitpicking "intent"
TeyshaBlue
08-24-2012, 10:38 AM
Yeah, that's real convincing. I can see the ALEC language re: education so clearly now.
http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif
and LfuckingOL at willful ignorance. That's Thinkprogress's gig.
boutons_deux
08-24-2012, 10:52 AM
http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed
google "alec language in state bills"
ALEC is a non-profit that violates the law by lobbying widely and aggressively.
coyotes_geek
08-24-2012, 10:54 AM
lots of red herrings and straw men
There is no monopoly.
If parents want to spend their education money on a private school, as they've done for many decades, they can.
...government's monopoly on taxpayer education dollars...
You can send your kid to a private school, but your tax dollars still belong to the public school. Monopoly proven.
lack of dollars for schools in poor districts is not the only reason those schools fail. It's well known black and Hispanic culture, in general, doesn't put as much value on education as Asian and middle class Euro-Americans. (and save me the fucking anecdotes and exceptions, please).
So long as the public schools in the suburbs are giving quality educations to the white kids, that should be good enough for everyone else.
No real discrepancy between these two statements. Seems I characterized your position pretty accurately.
I can guarantee you reason VRWC/ALEC is pushing so hard to destroy public schools isn't to get their hands on small funds for underprivileged kids in underfunded schools.
They want the taxpayer dollars of middle class parents in funded districts transferred to for-profit non-unionized charters, and, above, to bust the teachers' union as a source Democratic/democratic funding.
You're more interested in protecting the government's monopoly on taxpayer education dollars than you are in ensuring that every child has access to a quality education.
Heaven forbid a poor minority stuck in a failing public school be given an alternative. That could just ruin everything.
:wakeup
VRWC/ALEC doesn't give a shit about education outcomes.
Neither do you. You've made it abundantly clear that protecting the democratic funding source is what's important.
Nbadan
08-25-2012, 01:21 AM
Times are going to get interesting now that most schools in TX have failed AYP for at least one year..next year the students attending these schools will have school choice..i wish some of these parents in poorer districts would move their kids to the North or Northeast side districts and level the 'playing field' so to say...and that's just it, vouchers or not, private or public schools, there are only a finite amount of good teachers just like there are a finite amount of good doctors, teachers, and car mechanics...I'm not saying that every good teacher works at a Northside district, nor that every teacher who works on the North side is a good teacher, but the challenges for a good teacher at a poor district are exponential and the pay often less...
Nbadan
08-25-2012, 01:24 AM
You can send your kid to a private school, but your tax dollars still belong to the public school. Monopoly proven.
There's no monopoly ass hat even if you gave everyone a $6K voucher, which is really what poor districts pay per student, that money wouldn't go far in private education, especially better schools...
boutons_deux
10-13-2012, 08:23 AM
ALEC/VRWC see charter schools as a just another way to suck wealth out of taxpayers' pockets, while delivering, in classic capitalist mode, the shittiest possible product for highest possible price.
Charter Schools Sold Like an Investment to Wealthy Foreigners Looking for a Green Card
According to a Miami Today report last week, these Chinese financiers are taking advantage of the U.S. EB-5, an Immigrant Investor Program (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=facb83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=facb83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) that sets aside certain visas for investors who stimulate economic growth within the United States. The investors are required to invest at least $1 million and create at least 10 full-time jobs for U.S. residents. The EB-5 process has therefore been dubbed the “green card via red carpet.”
So what are these Chinese financiers investing millions of dollars in as a way to win their green cards? Evidently, charter schools. In fact, they have invested $30 million in charter schools in Florida alone. And according to the report, they are planning to invest three times that amount in the next year.
Speaking about these educational institutions in business terms, Brain said:
It’s a very stable business, very recession-resistant. It’s a very high-demand product. There’s 400,000 kids on waiting lists for charter schools ... the industry’s growing about 12-14% a year. … It’s a public payer, the state is the payer … and if you do business with states with solid treasuries, then it’s a very solid business.
Meanwhile, Florida’s State Board of Education announced a new plan this week, which aims to double (http://staugustine.com/news/local-news/2012-10-10/state-wants-double-charter-school-enrollment#.UHcjmRhnHbM) charter school enrollment in the state, from 9 percent enrollment to 17 percent enrollment within the next six years.
http://www.alternet.org/education/charter-schools-sold-investment-wealthy-foreigners-looking-green-card
boutons_deux
10-13-2012, 08:39 AM
It's harder for charter schools to keep teachers
http://extras.mysanantonio.com/pdf/Teacher-turnover-093012.pdf
Teachers leave Bexar County charter schools almost three times more often than at traditional public schools, which generally pay more and perform better academically, according to an Express-News analysis of five years of state data.
The average teacher turnover rate for charter school districts was 46 percent, compared with 13 percent for traditional school districts,
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/It-s-harder-for-charter-schools-to-keep-teachers-3905914.php#ixzz29Bae75WY
Many charter school pay peanuts (more money for administrators and investors), and get monkeys for teachers who accept, for a short while, such low salaries vs other jobs. Perhaps the low-paid teachers aren't qualified for better paying jobs.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.