More evidence on how bad the public schools are failing our kids

[sachiko]

Originally Posted by homers brother

I wonder that, not only have we been duped into believing that free education is a right, we're headed down the road that college entrance is a right as well? Some (OWS, et al) already would have you believe not only that entrance is a right, but also free college tuition. Back when families encouraged that challenging attainment of a high school diploma, education meant something. Now that a high school diploma is required (either by law or by "right", depending on your perspective), is college the new "high school diploma"? And is it being dumbed-down the way K12 education has? We might want to consider entitlement to a college education and all the money that's supposed to come from it as the topic of another thread.

I'm one of those who believes that a free education is a right in this country. I think the establishment of that right goes back to the time when a community, believing the education of their children would benefit the community, established a school and hired a teacher.

But just as the right to keep and bear arms doesn't require me to own a gun, the right to an education should not requre you to become educated. And those who do not wish to become educated should be relieved of that burden. But the number of people in that category, ideally, should be fairly small.

Instead we have a substantial number of people raised in a culture that denigrates education or, at least, sees no value in it, because it is not required in order to collect welfare-or disability- benefits. Teachers, even in a low rated school can take a student like me, encouraged by a mother like mine, and turn out a successful student. But no matter how skilled and knowledgeable a teacher might be, they can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

The problem is not the schools. We need to focus on the real problem and turn this culture around. And this is going to require making some changes that will NOT be politically correct.

[homers brother]

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse

all the above. As much as you thought I was totally against teachers, I was and am not against teachers.....As you see from my posts, there are some serious issues in school, yet where is the first walkout/sit in to protest the degenrits in school....

I probably thought that because you seemed overly focused on the teachers. We're getting somewhere now. And, if you read through my posts, you should see that I'm not entirely pro-teacher and I am most certainly not pro-union in the public sector. No, I can't say that I've seen any organized protest by teachers in regard to the punks they're having to deal with. I can't say that I'm all that surprised though, that would be a protest against the parents, a fair portion (particularly in the urban demographic) who vote "D" in November, and the unions aren't going to anything to alienate them and lose the money and influence they gain in government under administrations sympathetic to their whims.

That some teachers have taken their classes to protests in Wisconsin as participants borders on dereliction. Who knows why they were motivated to do that, and what - exactly - did attending those protests accomplish within their assigned course of study?

I'm not sure you're getting my point about the workforce though. It often takes a bit more specialized exposure to equipment and processes beyond the "three Rs" to give anyone an advantage applying for jobs in service or other support industries. Yes, they do need to be proficient enough to perform basic math tasks, to read instructions and plans, and to communicate verbally and in writing. I know of a number of programs, almost always in "alternative" high schools, which generally accept that their students aren't going to successful in the exciting world of calculus, but show potential in "trade"-type programs which have a very clear line into the workforce, often with certifications.

Many school districts establish gradients for their diplomas - terms like "advanced", "general", and "basic." Just for discussion's sake, maybe a student who cannot/will not perform traditional, high-rigor coursework instead focuses on "basic" knowledge (practical math rather than math theory, basic Earth and life sciences rather than Chemistry and Physics, English rather than French or Latin, etc.). No, they wouldn't get an "advanced" diploma, but a "basic" diploma instead, with skills-based certifications in "Food Safety and Sanitation", "Construction Technology," etc.?

Just what DO we expect as basic proficiency? While I recognize that a lot of the things I do today have advanced mathematic or scientific concepts behind them and I've become proficient in them, I joke that the high school course I use the MOST on a daily basis is .... typing? I didn't see that one coming some thirty years ago. I completed advanced mathematics in high school, but the "basic" proficiency then was considered "consumer math" - some kids never went beyond that, and some took all four years in high school to finally master it (and if they didn't, they didn't graduate - but not too many governmental agencies were concerning themselves with things like "graduation rates" back then, either). Today, the pressure and the proficiency isn't in that old "consumer math", but "Algebra I".

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse

Our problems are in the unmotivated school kids. Not every kid need to be in the military school setting but we can agree a selection from the elite education service to the military style run school would go far in the most troubled areas with allowing the parent to choose which is best.

I don't think I'd argue about diversity in the context of providing "advanced" students with "advanced" curricula, "general" students with "general" curricula, and "basic" students with "basic" curricula - provided the student's performance to-date and the indicators found there bears upon the offerings to the parent. If your kid is one of the "unmotivateds," I'm not necessarily thinking that student should be allowed into a high-rigor, "college-prep"-type school just because the parents have the means or ability to select that kind of school.

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse

His answer was "vision". He went on to say schools can't teach vision. Find away to instill vision in the youth and they will be successful.

A Sage observation, for certain. Though I doubt we'd ever see "9th Grade Vision" as a course offering, I'm not sure that schools don't have at least some role in promoting the kinds of thought that can generate vision in youth? Parents probably play the largest role (and maybe that's become a liability as the family unit is destroyed?), but coaches and teachers often do play critical functions even in those situations helping a kid lift themselves out of a bad situation simply by helping them "see" where they want to be in the years ahead, and then helping them map out the journey. This is the one aspect of admissions and advising that I absolutely enjoyed while on the University campus, more often than not simply helping students "RE-vision" (and revise) their degree and career plans.

[Fieldmouse]

Case in point math vs real world applications. I have 4 years of advanced math course under my belt on top of all the advanced ones you get in high school. By the nature of engineering degree you take multiple math courses even in one semester. Granted, I preferred algebra over geometry, I still could hold my own. My friend who struggled in math while in school is now one hell of a carpenter. I suck at it. I can build stuff but not to his level. When I have a big project, I call him. To watch him apply the basic geometry and what a wiz he is, I shake my head as to why he struggled in geometry.

I focused on teachers because already pointed out, we can't mandate parenting. Folks like steph won't allow us to cut off millionaires from the welfare roles but claim Non PC changes are coming soon. We can right now demand truth in grading from the teachers. No more passing a kid along for social reasons. We need to demand teachers only award the grades if they are earned and back them when the crap hits the fan because little Johnny won't be going to the next grade this fall.

[Sfury]

So much back and forth with Homers, and yet, no movement was actually made.

I find it amusing that someone would want to teach "vision" to students. Vision is a substitution of the term goal. Goals are something people want to attain. You can't teach that. Something has to motivate someone to develop goals. That traditionally comes from the family, and is reinforced at school.

Now, it is something that comes at school with the lack of guidance at home.

To want to teach a vision is to want to indoctrinate. Which is what many are claiming is happening now. Not in the District I work in, nor in the ones around me from what I can gather though. It seems that the studies done showing that parents, not anyone else, have a much more profound effect on their offspring keeps getting buried. Conservative parents tend to have conservative kids, and the opposite is true.

As Sachiko mentioned, if the parents leave the kids a blank slate, then the leanings of the people who provide guidance will be imprinted on the kids. The "indoctrination" that seems to be happening in the largest cities only from what I can tell of the studies, happens not because of some desire of the teachers. It's happening because of the lack of family.

Kids are like baby chickens. They imitate the adult chickens so they know how to survive. When the teachers are the successful model that they see, then that is what they have to strive for.

Teachers are there now to give a perspective in the field they teach. Not to guide the student down a path, but to enlighten them with what lays down the path of whatever subject. Should the students choose to, then they will have a bigger picture of what is out there, and can choose to do whatever.

College still is easily accessible. If you work to get in. The same goes for the Technical College system. That's the way it is. Hopefully, that is the way it will stay.

Fieldmouse only has a narrow view where the biased publications are what he reads and believes. Nothing can persuade him they are wrong, or biased, until they tell him that is the case. It's amusing watching him run around in circles to fit everything into his way of thinking. Instead of figuring out the puzzle, he's trying to fit a square block into the round blocks hole.

[Fieldmouse]

Hey slow boy, never said I wanted to teach vision. I merely mentioned that to point out just how bad our youth have become, they lack vision. You look pretty stupid for putting so much effort in a response to attack me. Perhaps a remedial reading course should be in your future.
Schools out for you sfury. You may go back to your video games.

[handles II]

Mr. Bergall,
You think you somehow are intellectually superior to me because you supplied links to your posts? Here are 5. It took me less than 2 minutes to find them and attach them. Intelligence my ass.
What you won't be able to do, that I can is read and comprehend them. But for the pleasure of other readers, here are three links on birthcontrol that site as I did in my post that depending on the source, around 65-85% of parents do want taught in schools. Mr. Bergall said that the majority of parents do not want it taught. I knew he was incorrect, bt here you go. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=1622610
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/04/1/gr040109.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/04/us...ted=all&src=pm

He also is unaware of what national education standards are or what they mean (I'm sure some of the rest of you are in this boat) so I attached two links, one for music, one is just a portion of what is required for science. Not too tough to figure out that national standards are not evil or bad, just a way to try to keep all of our kids close to the same minimums.
http://www.menc.org/resources/view/n...usic-education
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4962

Sorry Mr. Bergall. you are wrong, very wrong. You admitted that public schools are at a disadvantage, you admitted that NCLB was not effective, yet while you admit these simple things, you turn around and say that what you just admitted, isn't the way you feel, and therefore you won't listen or learn. No better than those public school kids who don't learn. Defeat me? No sir, you simply show your ignorance.

[Fieldmouse]

Defeat me? No sir, you simply show your ignorance.

if you haven't been defeated, then why the need for a new screen name? Interesting how you feel you need to start over like a newbie.

[handles II]

fieldmouse, a defunct email address made it happen that way, my old forum name wasn't accepted, so I went as close as I could.
Burnie,
I understand the problem of tenure with teachers, however I believe it's much less widespread than you think. Also there are not many ineffective teachers, there are some. Just as there are bad nurses, bad doctors, bad judges, bad construction workers. Unfortunately the ineffective teachers do tend to be put into some of the same schools, especially in an urban setting. ie, in a large urban district. The effective teachers, once tenured, will often try to transfer into "better" schools, the ones with lower poverty rates and higher parental involvement. This leaves the less effective and new teachers (also less effective in general) to do battle in some of the worst schools. What this does is it tends to compound the problems. Those large districts already struggle to fill teaching vaccancies, so it's a difficult problem, fire a teacher and potentially have no replacement, and very often, no substitute teachers who will work in some of those schools. Granted, we are often talking about the high school level. Walk into an elementary school in a bad neighborhood and the things going on inside are often very similar to other districts. Kids are learning, perhaps at a slower rate, but again, poverty has much to do with that, just as impoverished rural schools have lower graduation rates than more influental ones.
As for your pedophiles and similar...yes, if guilty, i'm with you 100%, that needs to change. Each state has different laws, so in one state they might be fired, in another they might not be. IMO, that's part of the problem. Like national standards, we should have some minimum rules across the board related to teaching licensing + hire/fire/repremand, at EVERY school, public, private, military or home schooled. But, when people only want states to have control, variations are unfortunately what you get. I look at things as if we are a nation first, states second.

[Fieldmouse]

fieldmouse, a defunct email address made it happen that way, my old forum name wasn't accepted, so I went as close as I could.

Ok, so what was your old name then?

So, you don't see a problem with the majority of kids graduating without earning their diploma? We are falling way behind other countries and the majority of kids entering college are unprepared. You can't blame that on poverty.

[handles II]

I'm not sure I follow... Are you saying that the majority of high school graduates don't have a high school diploma??
Please explain how that works and where it is happening.