NationStates Jolt Archive

American students don't really value their education. More emphasis is placed by parents and students alike on sports and socializing than on learning the curriculum. In many "black" schools studying hard and getting good grades is considered "acting white". In many "white" schools kids who work hard and get good grades are picked on and called "nerds".

As a result of this we have a population that falls prey to pseudoscience like UFOs, Astrology, homeopathy, and other crap. We have a population that sees something wrong with using unwanted embryos from fertility clinics for stem cell research, and would rather see them tossed in the trash. Our people can't see the difference between science, like evolution, and religion, like creationism. They elected George W. Bush for crap's sake!

What is causing our people to choose ignorance over education? What can be done to stop this before we become the Alabama of the world?

Here's a solution: Get the federal government's hands off of education! Prior to the involvement of the federal government in education, we had arguably the best (or at least, one of the best) education systems in the world.

American students don't really value their education. More emphasis is placed by parents and students alike on sports and socializing than on learning the curriculum. In many "black" schools studying hard and getting good grades is considered "acting white". In many "white" schools kids who work hard and get good grades are picked on and called "nerds".

As a result of this we have a population that falls prey to pseudoscience like UFOs, Astrology, homeopathy, and other crap. We have a population that sees something wrong with using unwanted embryos from fertility clinics for stem cell research, and would rather see them tossed in the trash. Our people can't see the difference between science, like evolution, and religion, like creationism. They elected George W. Bush for crap's sake!

What is causing our people to choose ignorance over education? What can be done to stop this before we become the Alabama of the world?

There was a similar wave after Germany lost World War One. (Source: The Day The Universe Changed, by Burke). It led to a disavowal of casuality as a mechanism by which observations could be explained by science. It also led, fortuituously, to discoveries in quantum physics that are logically and classically counterintuitive.

It also led to idiot beliefs in things like astrology (very popular in Germany between the World Wars) and homeopathic remedies (still very popular there).

And they elected Hitler! It's not like he just "took power" - they voted for him.

So Americans are not the only people who you might classify as "stupid".

After all, the British elected Chamberlain.

Here's a solution: Get the federal government's hands off of education! Prior to the involvement of the federal government in education, we had arguably the best (or at least, one of the best) education systems in the world.
So how do we make sure everyone gets an education that meets some minimum standards?

Also, how will getting the federal government out of education change our culture's anti-intellectual bent?

So how do we make sure everyone gets an education that meets some minimum standards?

Also, how will getting the federal government out of education change our culture's anti-intellectual bent?

Turn education over to state and local governments.

American students don't really value their education. More emphasis is placed by parents and students alike on sports and socializing than on learning the curriculum. In many "black" schools studying hard and getting good grades is considered "acting white". In many "white" schools kids who work hard and get good grades are picked on and called "nerds".

As a result of this we have a population that falls prey to pseudoscience like UFOs, Astrology, homeopathy, and other crap. We have a population that sees something wrong with using unwanted embryos from fertility clinics for stem cell research, and would rather see them tossed in the trash. Our people can't see the difference between science, like evolution, and religion, like creationism. They elected George W. Bush for crap's sake!

What is causing our people to choose ignorance over education? What can be done to stop this before we become the Alabama of the world?
i don't see it as a administrational or systematic problem, as such, but more of a cultural problem. education is not 'cool', whereas socialising, partying, being the 'class clown' and generally being anti-education is. some kids will always be like this, but the problem lies in other kids, the ones with bright potential, looking up to and emulating this behaviour precisely because its cool.
we have the same sort of cultural problem here in the UK too, and i honestly think it stems from the same place: hip-hop culture. seriously, this is the prevailing teen culture nowadays and in it being smart or educated is un-cool, and thats all that matters. ok, the same was true with the punk culture of the 80s as far as i can tell (i'm just voicing my probably biased and uninformed viewpoint here), but this new culture is, seemingly, even more prevalent.

it seems in america that this culture, through consumerism and marketing, gets literally everywhere. i mean in the UK we have teen bands & cultural icons appearing on the front of, for example, Pepsi bottles and cerial boxes, but not that much else - and this is an american influence. on TV these cultural icons are on a bit - on Top Of The Pops (a half hour show on once a week) and kids saturday TV shows, but, again, not much else. the difference i'm trying to point out is that the overtly commercial nature of many music artists and cultural icons that teens in school look up to, in america, leads to these kids not being able to escape this culture, from what i understand and have seen on my visits over there. so if the culture says 'school work is for geeks and loosers', and they can't get away from that message, then guess whats going to happen?

so what to do? government regulation on advertising to kids? regulation on the music artists and those cultural icons themselves? maybe not. follow the money. its the music publishers that are making the dough here and pushing the commerciality (if thats a word;)) of the whole industry - making this culture more and more pervasive. some kind of regulation here, perhaps? i don't know.

then again, the culture and attitudes will probably change soon anyway.

Turn education over to state and local governments.


riiiiiiight, our school districts can barely handle what they have already been given... you think they could handle thewhole thing??? or atleast find a way to pay for it.

Some comments about education from RAH "Expanded Universe"

Notes: 1980
1. He's (the illiterate) still a freak but he's all too common. There is a special circle in Hell for the "Educators" who decided that the Three R's really weren't all that important. Concerning our public schools today: Never have so many been paid so much for so little. I thank whatever gods there be that I went to school so many years ago that I had no choice but to be tightly disciplined in classes in which the teachers did not hesitate to fail and to punish.
My first-grade class had 63 kids in it, one teacher, no assistant. Before the end of the second semester all 63 could read.
<big snip of many pages>

the Decline of Education

My father never went to college. He attended high school in a southern Missouri town of 3000+, then attended a private 2-year academy roughly analogous to junior college today, except that it was very small—had to be; a day school, and Missouri had no paved roads.
Here are some of the subjects he studied in back-country 19th century schools: Latin, Greek, physics (natural philosophy), French, geometry, algebra, 1st year calculus, bookkeeping, American history, World history, chemistry, geology.
Twenty-eight years later I attended a much larger city high school. I took Latin and French but Greek was not offered; I took physics and chemistry but geology was not offered. I took geometry and algebra but calculus was not offered. I took American history and ancient history but no comprehensive history course was offered. Anyone wishing comprehensive history could take (each a one-year 5-hrs/wk course) ancient history, medieval history, modern European history, and American history—and note that the available courses ignored all of Asia, all of South America, all of Africa except ancient Egypt, and touched Canada and Mexico solely with respect to our wars with each.
I've had to repair what I missed with a combination of travel and private study . . . and must admit that I did not tackle Chinese history in depth until this year. My training in history was so spotty that it was not until I went to the Naval Academy and saw captured battle flags that I learned that we fought Korea some eighty years earlier than the mess we are still trying to clean up.
From my father's textbook I know that the world history course he studied was not detailed (how could it be?) but at least it treated the world as round; it did not ignore three fourths of our planet.
Now, let me report what I've seen, heard, looked up, clipped out of newspapers and elsewhere, and read in books such as Why Johnny Can't Read, The Blackboard Jungle, etc.
Colorado Springs, our home until 1965, in 1960 offered first-year Latin—but that was all. Caesar, Cicero, Virgil—Who dat?
Latin is not taught in the high schools of Santa Cruz County. From oral reports and clippings I note that it is not taught in most high schools across the country.
"Why this emphasis on Latin? It's a dead language!" Brother, as with jazz, in the words of a great artist, "If you have to ask, you ain't never goin' to find out." A person who knows only his own language does not even know his own language; epistemology necessitates knowing more than one human language. Besides that sharp edge, Latin is a giant help in all the sciences—and so is Greek, so I studied it on my own.
A friend of mine, now a dean in a state university, was a tenured professor of history—but got riffed when history was eliminated from the required subjects for a bachelor's degree. His courses (American history) are still offered but the one or two who sign up, he tutors; the overhead of a classroom cannot be justified.
A recent Wall Street Journal story described the bloodthirsty job hunting that goes on at the annual meeting of the Modern Languages Association; modern languages—even English—are being deemphasized right across the country; there are more professors in MLA than there are jobs.
I mentioned elsewhere the straight-A student on a scholarship who did not know the relations between weeks, months, and years. This is not uncommon; high school and college students in this country usually can't do simple arithmetic without using a pocket calculator. (I mean with pencil on paper; to ask one to do mental arithmetic causes jaws to drop—say 17 x 34, done mentally. How? Answer: Chuck away the 34 but remember it. (10 + 7)2 is 289, obviously. Double it: 2(300 – 11), or 578.
But my father would have given the answer at once, as his country grammar school a century ago required perfect memorizing of multiplication tables through 20 x 20 = 400 . . . so his ciphering the above would have been merely the doubling of a number already known (289)—or 578. He might have done it again by another route to check it: (68 + 510)—but his hesitation would not have been noticeable.
Was my father a mathematician? Not at all. Am I? Hell, no! This is the simplest sort of kitchen arithmetic, the sort that high school students can no longer do—at least in Santa Cruz.
If they don't study math and languages and history, what do they study? (Nota Bene! Any student can learn the truly tough subjects on almost any campus if he/she wishes—the professors and books and labs are there. But the student must want to.)
But if that student does not want to learn anything requiring brain sweat, most U.S. campuses will babysit him 4 years, then hand him a baccalaureate for not burning down the library. That girl in Colorado Springs who studied Latin—but no classic Latin—got a "general" bachelor's degree at the University of Colorado in 1964. I attended her graduation, asked what she had majored in. No major. What had she studied? Nothing, really, it turned out—and, sure enough, she's as ignorant today as she was in high school.
<more snippage>
I first started noticing the decline of education through mail from readers. I have saved mail from readers for forty years. Shortly after World War Two I noticed that letters from the youngest were not written but hand-printed. By the middle fifties deterioration in handwriting and in spelling became very noticeable. By today a letter from a youngster in grammar school or in high school is usually difficult to read and sometimes illegible—penmanship atrocious (pencilmanship—nine out of ten are in soft pencil, with well-smudged pages), spelling unique, grammar an arcane art.
Most youngsters have not been taught how to fold 8½" x 11" paper for the two standard sizes of envelopes intended for that standard sheet.
Then such defects began to show up among college students. Apparently "Bonehead English" (taught everywhere today, so I hear) is not sufficient to repair the failure of grammar and high school teachers who themselves in most cases were not adequately taught.
I saw sharply this progressive deterioration because part of my mail comes from abroad, especially Canada, the United Kingdom, the Scandinavian countries, and Japan. A letter from any part of the Commonwealth is invariably neat, legible, grammatical, correct in spelling, and polite. The same applies to letters from Scandinavian countries. (Teenagers of Copenhagen usually speak and write English better than most teenagers of Santa Cruz.) Letters from Japan are invariably neat—but the syntax is sometimes odd. I have one young correspondent in Tokyo who has been writing steadily these past four years. The handwriting in the first letter was almost stylebook perfect but I could hardly understand the phrasing; now, four years later, the handwriting looks the same but command of grammar, syntax, and rhetoric is excellent, with only an occasional odd choice in wording giving an exotic flavor.
Our public schools no longer give good value. We remain strong in science and engineering but even students in those subjects are handicapped by failures of our primary and secondary schools and by cutback in funding of research both public and private. Our great decline in education is alone enough to destroy this country . . . but I offer no solutions because the only solutions I think would work are so drastic as to be incredible.

Education would be improved... if there weren't so many kids!

riiiiiiight, our school districts can barely handle what they have already been given... you think they could handle thewhole thing??? or atleast find a way to pay for it.

Well, if you want the federal government to continue to control education, you can expect the quality to continue to go downhill.

Education would be improved... if there weren't so many kids!
Yes, but how do we weed out the idiots at an early age (before they can be a bad influence on the ones who can learn), and how do we dispose of them in a legal manner?

the biggest problem is that education is funded based on test scores. there are big schools that make a lot of money here becasue they raise their standards so high that kids are forced to work their asses off or drop out, thus making test scores improve dramaticly.

The government should give schools a flat ammount and have the big buisnesses that are so closely linked to the government donate things like computers and books so that education becomes fair.

Yes, but how do we weed out the idiots at an early age (before they can be a bad influence on the ones who can learn), and how do we dispose of them in a legal manner?

Legal, shmegal! Laws can always be changed, thats why law is such a great thing. As for methodology, I am in favor of enforced parental licensing standards, limits on numbers of children one can have, free contraception, and retroactive abortion.

the biggest problem is that education is funded based on test scores. there are big schools that make a lot of money here becasue they raise their standards so high that kids are forced to work their asses off or drop out, thus making test scores improve dramaticly.

Or you get, like you did here in Chicago, Teachers who cheat on the student's standardized tests.

The government should give schools a flat ammount and have the big buisnesses that are so closely linked to the government donate things like computers and books so that education becomes fair.
How about if schools went back to Teaching things like Reading, Writing, Mathmatics and Science and leave the social engineering to the Parents?

The government should give schools a flat ammount and have the big buisnesses that are so closely linked to the government donate things like computers and books so that education becomes fair.

Even though I dislike the centralising of education, the hairs on the back of my neck rise when I hear that someone wants to merge big business with education.

Even though I dislike the centralising of education, the hairs on the back of my neck rise when I hear that someone wants to merge big business with education.
Sure, why not. We could have the Exxon/Mobile and Dow chemical Environmental conservation class taught as science, the Taco Bell food pyramid in health class, and English Literature brought to you by DC comics. That'll work out great!

Sure, why not. We could have the Exxon/Dow Environmental conservation class taught as science, the Taco Bell food pyramid in health class, and English Literature brought to you by DC comics. That'll work out great!
:eek:

*shivers*

Oh God no! The hallucinations, they're back!

You've got to bust the Unions and make the schools corporate affairs.

Until the teachers have a reason to achive (read: raises) the failing schools will continue to fail. Quite simply, there is too much graft and corruption in government. At least corporations must be openly audited.

Will is solve everything? No. But it will go a LONG way.

Problem Number One: Lousy parents. Parents live unto themselves and proxy their children out to daycare farms so they can increase their output to buy more stuff. Americans scream about handing over a single digit percentage of their retirement over to private industry but have no guilt about throwing their kids into daycares. Then it's pick the kids up, feed em and get em to bed so the parents can relax.

We can not legislate good parenting.

You've got to bust the Unions and make the schools corporate affairs.

Until the teachers have a reason to achive (read: raises) the failing schools will continue to fail. Quite simply, there is too much graft and corruption in government. At least corporations must be openly audited.


The horror.

THE HORROR!!

And unfortunatly I think this is the future. In Merry Olde Englande anyway. :(

If I ever have children I might even home school them, if things go this far.

The way I see it from here in England, and we do have one of the best, if not the best education system in the world, is that theres too much darn commercialisation over there in the USA: you have multi-national conglemerates smashing you in their faces every 10 seconds and every kid is competing against everyone else. It's like on the movies I've see in the schools, like American Pie. You have the "football" captain who is like the most favoured guy in school, who the ceerleaders all compete for, then all the nerds who everyone takes the piss of.

It's this over commercialisation and the competetion between kids that seems to be the problem. I think someone else mentioned this too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarchic Conceptions
Even though I dislike the centralising of education, the hairs on the back of my neck rise when I hear that someone wants to merge big business with education.

Sure, why not. We could have the Exxon/Mobile and Dow chemical Environmental conservation class taught as science, the Taco Bell food pyramid in health class, and English Literature brought to you by DC comics. That'll work out great!

Not merge... it's changing business plans. Corporations change their modus opporendi frequently. One must be agile to survive, and education is proving that the status quo (as it has been since the 70s, at least!) isn't working.

Sure, why not. We could have the Exxon/Mobile and Dow chemical Environmental conservation class taught as science, the Taco Bell food pyramid in health class, and English Literature brought to you by DC comics. That'll work out great!
Well, it will work every bit as well as the current mish-mash of Liberal/Eco Psudo Science, Sociaisimology and Political Correctness. :headbang:

I think both (all) ideologies should keep their noses out of the classroom and get back to ensuring we have literate, numerate children. :mad:

If I ever have children I might even home school them, if things go this far.

For heaven's sake, and your child's (if you ever have any :) ), please DO NOT home school them. I know a guy who was home-schooled and he turned out just as you described. He's a complete social outcast, and will never have a future in anything ;)

The way I see it from here in England, and we do have one of the best, if not the best education system in the world,

Which part of the UK are you in?

is that theres too much darn commercialisation over there in the USA: you have multi-national conglemerates smashing you in their faces every 10 seconds and every kid is competing against everyone else. It's like on the movies I've see in the schools, like American Pie. You have the "football" captain who is like the most favoured guy in school, who the ceerleaders all compete for, then all the nerds who everyone takes the piss of.

This is a sad sad day for international relations :p

:)

The horror.

THE HORROR!!

And unfortunatly I think this is the future. In Merry Olde Englande anyway. :(

If I ever have children I might even home school them, if things go this far.

I worked for 3 years as a non-union worker in a small city's school system. (It had 53 schools with over 15,000 kids). Trust me, it is necessary.

IMHO, home schooling is not the answer. Kids need to be with other kids, and learn how do deal with life outside the home.

Which part of the UK are you in?

I'm in Bolton, my constituency is Bolton West, which happens to be the seat of the Education Minister Ruth Kelly actually, so I could be a little biased ;)

I just see the standards in schools really raising: we have the highest results for 11 year olds in Europe, funding has been raised over £1000 per pupil in real terms and GCSE results were at an all time high last year.

I was also reffering to the best Universisties in the world: Oxford and Cambridge.

Then again, I may also be biased as I went to Cambridge :P

For heaven's sake, and your child's (if you ever have any :) ), please DO NOT home school them. I know a guy who was home-schooled and he turned out just as you described. He's a complete social outcast, and will never have a future in anything ;)
Heh, you read that bit. Maybe I should have kept it in.

I don't think I ever would home school my children (if I have them) since I don't trust myself to even teach them basic english (thank god for word processors, I cannot write or spell properly). Though home schooled children I have met do seem to be socially retarded (though they are usually decent people when you meet them) and unable to cross their legs, I still don't think I would want to send a child to a state school the way things are going, private schools and tuition are out the window from the money aspect alone. I'm terrible with money and will probably continue to be.

*Sigh* whittering again. Sorry.

I worked for 3 years as a non-union worker in a small city's school system. (It had 53 schools with over 15,000 kids). Trust me, it is necessary.

I'm sure your right that it would work better then the current system. Simply put, I do not see it as a desirable option. Call me whatever you want, a commie, jealous, whatever, but I just don't trust corporations or large amounts of money, especially in regards to education.

IMHO, home schooling is not the answer. Kids need to be with other kids, and learn how do deal with life outside the home.

Same here. I was just being flippant. I took out the part that made ot more obvious I was being that, because it was a little too silly, even by my standards.

I'm in Bolton, my constituency is Bolton West, which happens to be the seat of the Education Minister Ruth Kelly actually, so I could be a little biased ;)

I just see the standards in schools really raising: we have the highest results for 11 year olds in Europe, funding has been raised over £1000 per pupil in real terms and GCSE results were at an all time high last year.

I was also reffering to the best Universisties in the world: Oxford and Cambridge.

Then again, I may also be biased as I went to Cambridge :P

and Hull!

(Sorry. Must stop watching so much Blackadder.)

I'm sure your right that it would work better then the current system. Simply put, I do not see it as a desirable option. Call me whatever you want, a commie, jealous, whatever, but I just don't trust corporations or large amounts of money, especially in regards to education.

You've already got it, only the corporation is called City Hall. (It was particularly bad where I was: the same party had been in the Mayor's chair since 1912! Corrupt as could be...

Same here. I was just being flippant. I took out the part that made ot more obvious I was being that, because it was a little too silly, even by my standards.

Fair enough. :D

Heh, you read that bit. Maybe I should have kept it in.

I don't think I ever would home school my children (if I have them) since I don't trust myself to even teach them basic english (thank god for word processors, I cannot write or spell properly). Though home schooled children I have met do seem to be socially retarded (though they are usually decent people when you meet them) and unable to cross their legs, I still don't think I would want to send a child to a state school the way things are going, private schools and tuition are out the window from the money aspect alone. I'm terrible with money and will probably continue to be.


*Sigh* whittering again. Sorry.

It depends alot on the individul school really - you get alot of variety. It also depends on support from parents, as young people it is very easy to fall into the wrong crowds etc.

You've already got it, only the corporation is called City Hall. (It was particularly bad where I was: the same party had been in the Mayor's chair since 1912! Corrupt as could be...

True. Should really try and find an education system I agree with since I seem to disagree with all the ones I know about :(

Though in my case the corporation is the Departement of Education (I think)

It depends alot on the individul school really - you get alot of variety. It also depends on support from parents, as young people it is very easy to fall into the wrong crowds etc.

True. I'd be a terrible parent obviously. I get baffled easily by day to day stuff. And no, I wasn't home schooled :p

True. Should really try and find an education system I agree with since I seem to disagree with all the ones I know about :(

Though in my case the corporation is the Departement of Education (I think)


Exactly. And they and City Hall have been in bed with each other for decades. You'd be amazed at some of the stuff I saw...

snip

This is why my kids will be home schooled.

Exactly. And they and City Hall have been in bed with each other for decades. You'd be amazed at some of the stuff I saw...

Trust me, nothing the state does surprises me.

Honestly, I could quite easily believe that William Hague is the love child of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Also, apologies, I fear I have lowered the tone of the thread somewhat.

Here's how I see it:

If the Federal Government is going to pass legislation like, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, then it should provide the funds, with no strings attached, (the legislation already spells out how the funds are to be used), It cannot reduce funding and if it is warranted, funding should be increased to continue the education of the US's children.

States that pass legislation to help fund education should also be unable to remove said funding. Indiana just reduced funding to schools, South Bend, IN pink slipped nearly 400 teachers, SB Schools are nearly all urban schools and fight tooth and nail to get any money to support the number of students they must teach.

If a state feels it can support its education system and refuses help from the Feds then they should be allowed to do so. Without penalization. Utah as opted to do this.

Teachers who are no longer viable to the system should be removed. Yes I am attacking tenure.

Students should be in school, in a year round system, with breaks of not more than two weeks, so that parents can plan vacations etc. around the breaks. Standardized testing is greatly affected by the summer break. The actual number of days in school does not increase. Although this also should be looked at.

Students should also be in school a full eight hour day just like most adults are at an eight hour day job. Teachers will have more time to teach and assist students in the core 40 subjects. Not to mention fewer latch key kids, maybe even reducing gang related activity and vandalism after school.(maybe)

Schools should not have more than Twenty(20) students per class room. 18 is the preferred number.

Teachers should never have to go into a bargaining session with an administration to get a raise. Salaries should be competative with real world upper middle income salaries. Teachers shouldn't be working second jobs to support their families.

School systems should never have to beg for supplies in the class room. This should go without saying.

Standardized testing of students should be taken at a time appropriate to the students age, mental capacity, and physical attributes. Taking a standardized test after the summer break to see what children have learned in the previous school year makes no sense. Also students who are mentally and physically handicapped should be allowed to take tests geared toward their handicaps. A student who is mentally age 5 but is physically age 13, should not be taking the standardized test for the 8th grade. Physically handicapped students such as hearing impaired and or are physiaclly unable to walk, etc. should be allowed time to take the standardized testing commiserate to their handicap.

I've said enough.

And they elected Hitler! It's not like he just "took power" - they voted for him.

It is like he just "took power" - most did not vote for him!

http://europeanhistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vwc.edu%2Flibrary_tech%2Fwwwpages%2Fdgraf%2Fweim.htm

In the July elections, the Nazi Party won 13,745,000 votes which gave them 230 out of the 608 seats in the Reichstag. Although the Nazis were the largest party, they were still short of a majority. Hitler, however, demanded that he be made Chancellor but was offered only the position of Vice-Chancellor in a coalition government, which he refused.
http://www.secondworldwar.co.uk/ahitler.html

The U.S. has many problems in education. Much of it has to do with parents.

In America, upper class parents are professionals. There is a debate as to whether or not teaching is a profession. Because of this, many upper class parents look down upon teachers. These parents are higher educated (in some cases) and better paid. These parents become counter productive to education because they think they know what is right, and that the teachers could be wrong (they can be wrong, but so can the parents).

On the other end of the spectrum are lower class parents. Many are illiterate in English, and some don't even speak the language. They stay out of schools because they don't think they can help.

Both scenarios are equally dangerous. Education cannot just end at the bell. It needs to be a constant process.

Additionally, it must be understood that schools do not just teach math, science, etc. They also socialize children. Most of a students time is spent in school, and therefore, teachers act as rolemodels. The problems in our schools are not a direct result of any one factor, and therefore can not be fixed by any one solution. What is needed is a big cultural change, which is very slow to happen.

However, we have been in the longest period of educational reform (the last 20 years) which means that people are listening to teachers and things are getting done. I know it seems hard to see, but our schools are still some of the best in the world.

We currently lack something to drive students into math and science (I myself am an English ed. major) We don't have the challenge of "beating the commies to the moon" or "beating the Kaiser". We have no great challenge to drive us into the fields that establish and maintain a superpower standing. In fact, the university system (which powers most of the nations scientific research) basicly imports scientists to make these discoveries. Look at any math or science or engineering college and count how many native born americans are teaching.

QUOTE=Pharoah Kiefer Meister]Here's how I see it:

If the Federal Government is going to pass legislation like, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, then it should provide the funds, with no strings attached, (the legislation already spells out how the funds are to be used), It cannot reduce funding and if it is warranted, funding should be increased to continue the education of the US's children. [/quote]

How will throwing more money at it help? See http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html

States that pass legislation to help fund education should also be unable to remove said funding. Indiana just reduced funding to schools, South Bend, IN pink slipped nearly 400 teachers, SB Schools are nearly all urban schools and fight tooth and nail to get any money to support the number of students they must teach. I agree that it would be more appropriate to dump 100 administrators. More Bang for the Buck.

If a state feels it can support its education system and refuses help from the Feds then they should be allowed to do so. Without penalization. Utah as opted to do this. Yay Utah! Go Mormons!

Teachers who are no longer viable to the system should be removed. Yes I am attacking tenure. As any thinking person should.

Students should be in school, in a year round system, with breaks of not more than two weeks, so that parents can plan vacations etc. around the breaks. Standardized testing is greatly affected by the summer break. The actual number of days in school does not increase. Although this also should be looked at.

Students should also be in school a full eight hour day just like most adults are at an eight hour day job. Teachers will have more time to teach and assist students in the core 40 subjects. Not to mention fewer latch key kids, maybe even reducing gang related activity and vandalism after school.(maybe) No real arguments here. The "Summer Break" is a hold over from a non-mechanized agrarian past.

Schools should not have more than Twenty(20) students per class room. 18 is the preferred number.

Why? The only reason we "need" low numbers in classrooms is the undiciplined nature of today's children. Remember, RAH had 63 children in his one-teacher first grade class... and ALL of them could read at the end of the first semester.

Teachers should never have to go into a bargaining session with an administration to get a raise. Salaries should be competative with real world upper middle income salaries. Teachers shouldn't be working second jobs to support their families. If they were working a standard 200 day work year, they would be making "competitive salaries". A teacher making 30K for 179 teacher-days makes the equivilent of 33K per year per hour worked - plus they can get their education loans discharged if they pay attention and do the right paperwork. Most of us will be paying on ours forever.

School systems should never have to beg for supplies in the class room. This should go without saying.

Define supplies. Some "necessary" supplies aren't. How many supplies do you need to teach the 3-Rs? It used to be done on a slate-board.

Standardized testing of students should be taken at a time appropriate to the students age, mental capacity, and physical attributes. Taking a standardized test after the summer break to see what children have learned in the previous school year makes no sense. Also students who are mentally and physically handicapped should be allowed to take tests geared toward their handicaps. A student who is mentally age 5 but is physically age 13, should not be taking the standardized test for the 8th grade. Physically handicapped students such as hearing impaired and or are physiaclly unable to walk, etc. should be allowed time to take the standardized testing commiserate to their handicap. I've said enough.

No real issue with making sure testing programs are commensurate with handicap - including the handicap of being an under/un educated "teacher". Test the teachers before testing the kids.

Yes, but how do we weed out the idiots at an early age (before they can be a bad influence on the ones who can learn), and how do we dispose of them in a legal manner?

Field trip to the Darwinisn Gene Pool Preserve... where signs such as this one may be found:

"Welcome to the Darwinian Gene Pool Preserve. Go ahead and lean over the safety rail as far as you like and hand-feed the carnivores."
-Stolen shamelessly from a comic drawn by Wiley Miller.

<snip> Additionally, it must be understood that schools do not just teach math, science, etc. They also socialize children. Most of a students time is spent in school, and therefore, teachers act as rolemodels.
Acting as a role model is vastly different than the "Socialization (socialisim) Curricula" of the modern NEA-based US school industry. But I guess it's important to have superior social skills when you can't read or write above the primary-school level.

The problems in our schools are not a direct result of any one factor, and therefore can not be fixed by any one solution. What is needed is a big cultural change, which is very slow to happen.
Oh, it's happening. It's called Home/Private Schooling. That's why the NEA screams as loud as they do.

However, we have been in the longest period of educational reform (the last 20 years) Oh yeah. The Whole Word method of reading (among many other disasters) was a great reform. which means that people are listening to teachers and things are getting done. No, people are listening to "education gurus" and the NEA. The NEA is interested in the NEA, not education, and the gurus need to sell books. I know it seems hard to see, but our schools are still some of the best in the world. Not according to international comparisons.

We currently lack something to drive students into math and science (I myself am an English ed. major) We don't have the challenge of "beating the commies to the moon" or "beating the Kaiser". We have no great challenge to drive us into the fields that establish and maintain a superpower standing. In fact, the university system (which powers most of the nations scientific research) basicly imports scientists to make these discoveries. Look at any math or science or engineering college and count how many native born americans are teaching.
Did you ever wonder that it might have somthing to do with the emphasis on "socialization" (yay social promotion!) rather than the emphasis on education? Education requires individual effort for individual achievement... it makes one a competitive individualist... anathema to the NEA and the Socialization Socialists (group hug everybody!)

Remember, don't use red pens to correct (oops... grade - different spelling or cultural grammar is valid and needs no "correction") a youngster's papers. You might hurt their feelings.

riiiiiiight, our school districts can barely handle what they have already been given... you think they could handle thewhole thing??? or atleast find a way to pay for it.
Massive beurocratic orginizations. There was a huge city government orginization running all the public schools in New York City up until the early 80's, and it created the world's best public school system. Massive quality control, more tax money to spend, and high overall teacher and administrator standards. It can work, it did for decades. Then they turned it over to school boards run by individual parents (probably what your district has), and these parents knew absolutely nothing about education, causing the quality to nosedive.

My elementary school has the "education is uncool" attitude. My town is full of people with no ambition, and those kids will spend their lives in this dinky town and turn into their parents, working menial jobs. My high school, however, encompasses a larger area, and has a generally pro-education feeling.

The problem?

It is a long list:

1. Elimination of "Special Education"

Out of the aura of Political Correctness, in order so that kids with Special Needs aren't made to feel "singled out", they are integrated into the normal classrooms. This results in teachers, without any special training, to be forced to either passover the kids, or to hold them back by holding to the slowest child in the class' pace.

2. Failure Is No Longer An Option.... Period

Because of "social age" children are regularly allowed to progress grades, so they do not feel socially pressured by being around "younger" kids... Even if they cannot pass the normal curriclum. They are allowed to "pass" to the next grade, to be around the kids they know. Because it would be too "hard" for them to have to repeat grade levels.

3. Standardization of Education accross state borders

All children are subjected to "Standardized" tests. To ensure all of them learn the same level of information. No longer is "State History" covered. Only "US History"... No longer are state politics covered... And all of this is eliminated for important historical information like "What was the name of the horse George Washington rode?"...

4. Tenured Contracts

Teachers are left with no accountability. If they teach long enough, they are "tenured" into an automatically renewing contract. And cannot be fired unless they specifically violate part of the contract (and even then, more than likely not).

5. In short Political Correctness

It has become the "job" of the US school system to "not offend" anyone. As opposed to actual education. They are not to be put under pressure, they are not to see failure, and they are not to feel "left out". Parents are not to be offended, and the school system must pander to their demands...

Addendum I: Laziness

Children have become lazy, thanks in part to the parents and society in general. Everyone expects to be spoonfed through childhood and adulthood. And there is little desire to "work" towards accomplishing anything. Lazy parents beget lazy children, which in turn begets more laziness.

_____

What to do?


1. Make teachers accountable, remove tenure.
2. Make children have to pass the curriculum in order to move to the next grade.
3. Create reliable and funded special education programs.
4. Remove the "trivia" based Standardized Tests.
5. Stop pandering to parents.
6. Stop trying not to "offend" or "pressure" anyone. Kids are there to learn, not to make friends. The force should be towards learning, not making friends, and feeling "good".

The problem?

It is a long list:

1. Elimination of "Special Education"

Out of the aura of Political Correctness, in order so that kids with Special Needs aren't made to feel "singled out", they are integrated into the normal classrooms. This results in teachers, without any special training, to be forced to either passover the kids, or to hold them back by holding to the slowest child in the class' pace.

2. Failure Is No Longer An Option.... Period

Because of "social age" children are regularly allowed to progress grades, so they do not feel socially pressured by being around "younger" kids... Even if they cannot pass the normal curriclum. They are allowed to "pass" to the next grade, to be around the kids they know. Because it would be too "hard" for them to have to repeat grade levels.

3. Standardization of Education accross state borders

All children are subjected to "Standardized" tests. To ensure all of them learn the same level of information. No longer is "State History" covered. Only "US History"... No longer are state politics covered... And all of this is eliminated for important historical information like "What was the name of the horse George Washington rode?"...

4. Tenured Contracts

Teachers are left with no accountability. If they teach long enough, they are "tenured" into an automatically renewing contract. And cannot be fired unless they specifically violate part of the contract (and even then, more than likely not).

5. In short Political Correctness

It has become the "job" of the US school system to "not offend" anyone. As opposed to actual education. They are not to be put under pressure, they are not to see failure, and they are not to feel "left out". Parents are not to be offended, and the school system must pander to their demands...

_____

What to do?

[b]
1. Make teachers accountable, remove tenure.
2. Make children have to pass the curriculum in order to move to the next grade.
3. Create reliable and funded special education programs.
4. Remove the "trivia" based Standardized Tests.
5. Stop pandering to parents.
6. Stop trying not to "offend" or "pressure" anyone. Kids are there to learn, not to make friends. The force should be towards learning, not making friends, and feeling "good".
Sounds good to me. Now how do we get the parents to take a serious interest in what their kids are learning or failing to learn?

The main problem really lies in the continual degradation of the American culture. One cannot apply the money argument, for the US spends more per student than most first world nations, yet only comes in average when compared to first world nations. It really is a matter of people not wanting to learn, of kids who feel that school is "not cool." Ah, but the cheerleader/football captain thing people mentioned doesn't really apply...this ain't the eighties. Now everyone wants to be a "gangsta."

QUOTE=Pharoah Kiefer Meister]Here's how I see it:

If the Federal Government is going to pass legislation like, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, then it should provide the funds, with no strings attached, (the legislation already spells out how the funds are to be used), It cannot reduce funding and if it is warranted, funding should be increased to continue the education of the US's children.

How will throwing more money at it help? See http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html[/quote]

My intent was to point out that the Feds passed the legislation and then under funded it.


Why? The only reason we "need" low numbers in classrooms is the undiciplined nature of today's children. Remember, RAH had 63 children in his one-teacher first grade class... and ALL of them could read at the end of the first semester.

There was a study done that showed that a lower class room size benefits all students. I am sorry I don't have the study readily available, but it does make sense to me.

If they were working a standard 200 day work year, they would be making "competitive salaries". A teacher making 30K for 179 teacher-days makes the equivilent of 33K per year per hour worked - plus they can get their education loans discharged if they pay attention and do the right paperwork. Most of us will be paying on ours forever.

You're right on what they can do to "reduce" their loans but when a teacher is fighting the upper crust parent to educate their child they should at least be paid a salary commiserate with their education.

Define supplies. Some "necessary" supplies aren't. How many supplies do you need to teach the 3-Rs? It used to be done on a slate-board.

Now you're pressing the issue, you know very well there are school systems that have little money to buy the basic supplies needed in a classroom. Nevada has a program where the teachers can go to a "store" to "purchase" supplies for their classrooms, the materials provided are donated as excess or discontinued materials from corporations. The program is a great concept but why is it necessary?

No real issue with making sure testing programs are commensurate with handicap - including the handicap of being an under/un educated "teacher". Test the teachers before testing the kids.

There are plenty of excellent teachers, and we are all tested before we can get our licenses. Granted each state has a different standard from the next, but when the school corporation is struggling it may not have a choice who it hires. As a result, students suffer and testing results go down, the state removes money, the corporation reduces its teaching staff, the teachers leave for better jobs leaving the corporation to struggle with what teachers it has. A vicious cycle...I'm not saying the corporation is without fault but something must be done to end this. I feel that the money the state provides to education should never be reduced the amount can always increase but never decrease how does this help the student?

If the Federal Government is going to pass legislation like, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, then it should provide the funds, with no strings attached, (the legislation already spells out how the funds are to be used), It cannot reduce funding and if it is warranted, funding should be increased to continue the education of the US's children.

Things like "No child left behind" are part of the problem. The idea that all students are the same and we can imporove our schools by constant testing and treating them as such is ludicrous.

IStandardized testing of students should be taken at a time appropriate to the students age, mental capacity, and physical attributes. Taking a standardized test after the summer break to see what children have learned in the previous school year makes no sense. Also students who are mentally and physically handicapped should be allowed to take tests geared toward their handicaps. A student who is mentally age 5 but is physically age 13, should not be taking the standardized test for the 8th grade. Physically handicapped students such as hearing impaired and or are physiaclly unable to walk, etc. should be allowed time to take the standardized testing commiserate to their handicap.

I've said enough.

You seem obsessed with standardized testing - which is part of the problem. The fact that we have these constant tests forces teachers to have their students memorize things that will be on the test, rather than actually teaching them.

Sounds good to me. Now how do we get the parents to take a serious interest in what their kids are learning or failing to learn?

You can't.... That's the problem with that end.

I think the goal should be the children's education. Whether the parents are interested, is of no concern to the educational system. Especially since there is no way to "force" them to take interest. If we concentrate on the children's education, the parental problem is solved, once the "new kids" become the parents...

The parents were part of the same detrimental education system, and political and personal pandering, that is now doing the same with the children.

If the system is concentrated on, the parental problem is solved, eventually...

Americans would do well to read Screwtapes speech on this subject.

What is wrong with American schools? In short, the bastardization of the concept of democracy. Because human beings are equal in rights, people have gotten the idea that they are equal in all things. This is not true. All people have natural aptitudes for different things. One person may do very well at academics. Another may do very well at painting. Another may be a prime soccer player. And so on.

The problem is that we have decided that everyone should be able to achieve all levels of education and become a highly educated profession. This is not true, and attempting to make it true simply drops our education to the lowest common denominator. We should be clear that there is no shame in not going to college. There is no shame in ending up with a 2 year degree. There is no shame in getting a skill and going into a skilled job.

Zero intellectual rigor in the public schools.

No foreign language education, no history education, no political science education, in some cases (by legislative fiat, no less) no science education.

And of course all of this leads to one conclusion - no faculty for critical reasoning.


Combine all of this with the mass media and people are easy victim to swindlers and shysters and the like.

I know that in my school there are a LOT of kids who just don't care. The main problem is that it is considered uncool, especially for guys, to be smart. The majority of the kids who don't care and are flunking (this is not true of everyone, but at least 2/3) are Hispanic. As I said before, this isn't true of everyone in my school, but it is true that generally the Hispanic kids care less about school and a lot of them are going to summer school. So, as someone has probably already said, motivation is, in my opinion, is the main problem with education now.

I dont think it is a problem.

When you look at education, you look at the bad education, you dont concentrate on private schools or catholic, christian, Jewish or other religious schools that offer better education. Plus public schools arent all bad, The one I went to had very good education. It got me to learnin all the stuffs I be needin' for my future!

I know that in my school there are a LOT of kids who just don't care. The main problem is that it is considered uncool, especially for guys, to be smart. The majority of the kids who don't care and are flunking (this is not true of everyone, but at least 2/3) are Hispanic. As I said before, this isn't true of everyone in my school, but it is true that generally the Hispanic kids care less about school and a lot of them are going to summer school. So, as someone has probably already said, motivation is, in my opinion, is the main problem with education now.

No you're right, Ive always noticed that its the minorities that get bad grades, and they dont care. I could get really sick of black girls saying "why you all up in my grill?" I wonder why the teachers were "in their grill?" Maybe its because someone had to concentrate on their education so they wouldnt make nothing out of their lives.

Not all the black girls did this of course.

But you need stupid, poorer, less achieving people in a society. Otherwise nothing will get accomplished.

Zero intellectual rigor in the public schools.
You got to be kidding me...

No foreign language education.
http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm

French I, II R, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
German I, II R, Accel I/II, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
Spanish I, II R, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
Latin I, II, Accel I/II, III, AP
Russian Intro.

You call that none?

no history education
http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm

SOCIAL STUDIES 9: GLOBAL HISTORY 1, SOCIAL STUDIES 9: EXPLORING THE WORLD, SOCIAL STUDIES 9: GLOBAL HISTORY 1 HONORS, SOCIAL STUDIES 10: GLOBAL HISTORY 2, SOCIAL STUDIES 10: GLOBAL HISTORY 2 HONORS, SOCIAL STUDIES 10 HONORS: WORLD CONNECTIONS, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN HISTORY, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN STUDIES, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN HISTORY HONORS, AP WORLD HISTORY, AP AMERICAN HISTORY.

Doesn't seem like none to me...

, no political science education
http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm
LAW AND GOVERNMENT, AMERICAN POLITICS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, AP MACRO ECONOMICS AND AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.

in some cases (by legislative fiat, no less) no science education.
Not even going to bother with that one...

You got to be kidding me...


http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm

French I, II R, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
German I, II R, Accel I/II, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
Spanish I, II R, II H, III R, III H, IV R, IV H, V PR, V H
Latin I, II, Accel I/II, III, AP
Russian Intro.

You call that none?


http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm

SOCIAL STUDIES 9: GLOBAL HISTORY 1, SOCIAL STUDIES 9: EXPLORING THE WORLD, SOCIAL STUDIES 9: GLOBAL HISTORY 1 HONORS, SOCIAL STUDIES 10: GLOBAL HISTORY 2, SOCIAL STUDIES 10: GLOBAL HISTORY 2 HONORS, SOCIAL STUDIES 10 HONORS: WORLD CONNECTIONS, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN HISTORY, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN STUDIES, SOCIAL STUDIES 11: AMERICAN HISTORY HONORS, AP WORLD HISTORY, AP AMERICAN HISTORY.

Doesn't seem like none to me...


http://www.niskayunaschools.org/district/Academics/POS.htm
LAW AND GOVERNMENT, AMERICAN POLITICS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, AP MACRO ECONOMICS AND AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.


Not even going to bother with that one...


I'm talking, obviously, about the broad swath of schools with problems, not the minority of schools which are good.

Come now, honestly.

Well, considering all New York State children have to take a certain amount Regents Exams to gradute, it would only make since that all schools in New York State teach Social Studies. Also, it is a State mandate that all children recieve at least 1/2 credit in American Politics, and at least one credit in a Language Other Than English (LOTE). So there goes those theories in New York...

But I can't speak for outside of New York... (Not going to harass you any more)

After all, the British elected Chamberlain.

Nah, he never fought a General Election as leader of the conservatives. He became prime minister after Baldwin, then the war happened, so the British never had the chance to vote on him as Prime Minister either.

I believe that the American general knowledge is way too little (or low?) in comparison with other nations.

I went to an American private highschool, we had about 22 seniors in our class, I didn't do anything (well, little) for school and still graduated 2nd best, only "beaten" by a girl who has attented that school since kindergarten...

Smaller classes and more relevance to life can do the trick if combined with teachers who know how to motivate their students.

When I was a substitute teacher I was sent to babysit some history/social studies students one day.
Their tough assignment for the day was to watch Happily Ever After. This was a class of sophmores. The walls were decorated with one of their class projects, Maps of the US done in Crayon, I'll repeat that, CRAYON. I should say, poorly done in CRAYON. I saw the Rockies in California, Washington D.C. somewhere in the middle of the country and a Miss. river that terminated into the Atlantic ocean somewhere in Georgia.
There was a stack of papers that had been turned in. Out of desperate boredom I began to read them. According to one of the papers Ghandi had attacked Pakistan with two nuclear weapons in 1948. This paper had received a C grade. Passing.
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. Sitting there with my Ghandi nuke paper, surrounded by poorly drawn crayon maps created by 16 year olds.

...and you were wishing Ghandi had nuked that highschool instead, huh?

...and you were wishing Ghandi had nuked that highschool instead, huh?

And this was at what was considered the best high school in the district in a district that had received three national awards for being one of the top districts in the nation.
A nuke would have been refreshing, a small tactical one in that teacher's car.

And you on the hill holding a little black box w/ antenna and a little red button?

As horrible as nukes are - when they go off they sure make an esthetic picture, don't they?

(I'm studying to become an English & Biology teacher at German highschool - therefore, these threads are of great interest to me: The German educational system is in need of a severe overhaul and I'll be stuck in the middle of it once I finish university...)

Edit: Typos only.

And you on the hill holding a little black box w/ antenna and a little red button?

As horrible as nukes are - when they go off they sure make an esthetic picture, don't they?

(I'm studying to become an English & Biology teacher at German highschool - therefore, these threads are of great interest to me: The German educational system is in need of a severe overhaul and I'll be stuck in the middle of it once I finish university...)

Edit: Typos only.

Yes it is odd isn't it. Something so destructive and terrible is so beautiful to look at.
I would prefer the box to been olive drab, I always loved that flat green color.
English/Biology teacher. . .umm, interesting combination :eek: I didn't quite understand the end of that there post. Would you like people to fix your typos or was that a note to yourself?

Americans would do well to read Screwtapes speech on this subject.

What is wrong with American schools? In short, the bastardization of the concept of democracy. Because human beings are equal in rights, people have gotten the idea that they are equal in all things. This is not true. All people have natural aptitudes for different things. One person may do very well at academics. Another may do very well at painting. Another may be a prime soccer player. And so on.

The problem is that we have decided that everyone should be able to achieve all levels of education and become a highly educated profession. This is not true, and attempting to make it true simply drops our education to the lowest common denominator. We should be clear that there is no shame in not going to college. There is no shame in ending up with a 2 year degree. There is no shame in getting a skill and going into a skilled job.

Great post! And you get bonus points for the "Screwtape Letters" referrence!!

A foreign language (with lots of correcting papers written by 16 year olds...) and a science subject (I love nature, biology is a given - besides, I can't teach physics or math, chemistry is too dull) are a good combination. Biology can also be taught in English (bi-lingual)

Something so destructive and terrible is so beautiful to look at? Yes... But then again - it only shows that even nukes work according to the natural laws ;)

And I did fix one typo (and add that I only did that instead of changing what I have said) ;)

A foreign language (with lots of correcting papers written by 16 year olds...) and a science subject (I love nature, biology is a given - besides, I can't teach physics or math, chemistry is too dull) are a good combination. Biology can also be taught in English (bi-lingual)

Something so destructive and terrible is so beautiful to look at? Yes... But then again - it only shows that even nukes work according to the natural laws ;)

And I did fix one typo (and add that I only did that instead of changing what I have said) ;)

And now I understand. And now I go to work. Matta ne.

Well, considering all New York State children have to take a certain amount Regents Exams to gradute, it would only make since that all schools in New York State teach Social Studies. Also, it is a State mandate that all children recieve at least 1/2 credit in American Politics, and at least one credit in a Language Other Than English (LOTE). So there goes those theories in New York...

But I can't speak for outside of New York... (Not going to harass you any more)

From what I've been told about regents exams in most states (including the one I live in), if you can't pass them in 8th grade, there is something seriously wrong with you.

[QUOTE=What is causing our people to choose ignorance over education? [/QUOTE]

at my school they were the same thing

The main problem with America in general is that Americans in general don't care or purposely ignore their problems and attack anyone and everyone who points them out to them as being anti-American and unpatriotic, because as everyone should know, America is the greatest country in the world, so what could there possibly be to fix? And besides, we're not suppose to fix our own problems, we're suppose to go crying to others to fix our problems for us. You don't like a show on television? Don't change the channel, find someone to cry to until they take it off the air! Don't agree with abortion? Don't just not have one, cry to someone until they make it illegal for everyone!

God bless America, land of the free, home of the brave. :rolleyes:

And not only that, but all I got out of high school was that they were purposely ignoring teaching us anything besides how to unquestioningly follow orders. I learned more by ignoring the teachers and doing my own thing during class.

Acting as a role model is vastly different than the "Socialization (socialisim) Curricula" of the modern NEA-based US school industry. But I guess it's important to have superior social skills when you can't read or write above the primary-school level
I can't really speak from any basis about this as I was lucky enough to attend a great school system. I think it is important to be able to communicate both verbally and non-verbally in any job, moreso in education. I intend on teaching secondary school, so I really have not had any education in how things are in the lower levels that would let me respond.

Oh, it's happening. It's called Home/Private Schooling. That's why the NEA screams as loud as they do.

I agree that home schooling is a great alternative. Private schools can suffer the same problems as public, so I'm gonna leave them out here. The problem with home schooling is many people are not taught how to work on deadlines (although, if certain school districts get their way, neither will public schools) and with other people (this is a gross generalization, I know. And I appologize in advance). Additionally, in modern America, where both parents are working, home schooling becomes impossible. Also, if there are things the parents don't know, there is a risk their children will never learn it properly. By having different teachers yearly, there is atleast a decent chance that the student will learn more.

Oh yeah. The Whole Word method of reading (among many other disasters) was a great reform.

Ugh. How about "inventive spelling"? "Spell it like it sounds!" Oh wait. English isn't a phonetic language. "They will learn to spell from error". Screw that, I learned to spell because I got tired of looking like an idiot when I wrote things (and admittedly, I still have alot of work. There are some words I just learned to avoid because I can't spell them for the life of me)

No, people are listening to "education gurus" and the NEA. The NEA is interested in the NEA, not education, and the gurus need to sell books.
You're right. sadly.


Did you ever wonder that it might have somthing to do with the emphasis on "socialization" (yay social promotion!) rather than the emphasis on education? Education requires individual effort for individual achievement... it makes one a competitive individualist... anathema to the NEA and the Socialization Socialists (group hug everybody!)

I think education needs to be first and foremost. However, it cannot be denied that schools pass along a vast amount of culture to students. Oh, and *hug back*

Remember, don't use red pens to correct (oops... grade - different spelling or cultural
grammar is valid and needs no "correction") a youngster's papers. You might hurt their feelings.
:headbang:
I nearly cried when I read that. I intend on using the brightest red marker to correct and grade (and they will be corrected AND graded) my students papers. If it hurts their feelings, good. Maybe they won't make the same mistake twice.



Tenure is a huge problem too, but I'd hate to see it go. Job security in the future would be nice :D ;)

Kids today have it harder than ever before but, the older generations still accuse them of being stupid and the school systems of being inept. They have AP classes, IB programs, and too many standardized tests. About a quarter of my friends in high school has some form of depression and nearly all of us has self-esteem issues. In my career as a student, our school district went through a major emergency three times. Schools today also have to deal with a greater span of values and cultures than they did 50 years ago. They also have to deal with the problems of drugs and sex that were virtually non-existant when my grandmother was in school. Schools have a tough time and people don't give them enough credit.

I haven't read this whole thread, as I haven't the time -- but I wanted to post something from the perspective of an active teacher before I dash.

I taught public schools for five years, and am in my second year of teaching college. What I believe high schools need is a healthy dose of discipline and it needs to start earlier than high school.

Yes, traditional lectures will no longer cut it. Yes, teachers need to me at least some part entertainer. But when we're also called on to be psychiatrist, watchdog/first line of defense for Child Protective Services, chaperones and any number of other things, it becomes so much harder to do when students have no respect for the position of instructor. When I was a substitute, it seemed that the rudest kids in the classes I'd subbed for were the ones who would cry "foul" when I became more strict than their normal classroom teacher. "My day" as a student was only 15-20 years ago, and NObody messed with a sub.

We're expected to be in loco parentis, but we cannot punish as we see fit. "Time outs" are completely ridiculous and the kids know it. In one district here, the five minute "time out" has rules of it's own -- the kid so punished must not attempt to engage or distract the class at all. Well how the hell am I supposed to watch that when I've got 30 more kids to teach and maintain? Add to that the rule that the kids in the class aren't supposed to provoke or distract the "timed out" kid (it's called "shadowing," and guess what penalty THAT gets...yup...another "time out"). So you wind up with one kid in "time out" who goads the class behind my back, and that same kid accuses other kids of "shadowing" -- none of which I can see because I'm trying to bloody well teach the class!

So I suppose, as liberal as I like to think I am, I'm conservative when it comes to school discipline. I'd LOVE to see school uniforms. I'd LOVE to see the return of corporal punishment. Not because I'm some kind of martinet, but because, believe it or not, fear helped keep the vast majority of us in line! I will NEVER forget Mr. Zinski's aerodynamically perfect spanking paddle. Holes drilled in a smooth, narrow and flat plank of maple with a leather-wrapped handle and NOTCHES IN THE SIDE! His class was quieter than church and twice as reverent. Nowdays, he'd be castigated and fired after parental outcry. "He can't spank MY child" -- well, he can if you can't impress upon the whelp the need for attention in class, or the need for respect of others and their property, or whatever school rules there are.

Thing is, I don't want to be a principal. I think something happens to you when you get a doctorate. I don't think it's every field, but in education, it is. Former teachers' memories of how classrooms work seem to just evaporate as they glom on to the latest educational legerdemain and force it down their faculty's throat every year. I only taught high school for five years, but we had a new educational "paradigm" (oh LORD how I hate that word) each year I was there. And being a music teacher, most of that crap didn't or couldn't apply because I didn't have the traditional 30-desk-and-a-black(white, now)board classroom.

So that's all I can dig up for a rant for now. I gotta run. Thanks for listening, NS General!

NdL

I only taught high school for five years, but we had a new educational "paradigm" (oh LORD how I hate that word) each year I was there.
to start, I hate that word with the flaming passion of 5000 suns. and it is used in every one of my friggin classes, from psych and lit on to education.

While I don't agree with all of your statements (uniforms and corporal punishment), I am curious...what grade(s) did you teach? also, what were your experiances with parents? I'm not trying to hijak the thread, but I think that parental relations are important in the school system, and since Intangelon was a teacher, maybe (s)he can provide some additional enlightenment. Not to mention I'm just generally curious about hearing about teachers experiances.

While I don't agree with all of your statements (uniforms and corporal punishment), I am curious...what grade(s) did you teach? also, what were your experiances with parents? I'm not trying to hijak the thread, but I think that parental relations are important in the school system, and since Intangelon was a teacher, maybe (s)he can provide some additional enlightenment. Not to mention I'm just generally curious about hearing about teachers experiances.

I'm a "he", but don't tell my mother, she'd be so disappointed.

My experiences with parents have ranged from angelic to psychotic. I've had parents who have supported me and my students and policies and have cheerfully offered advice, their time, their houses, their you name it. Others were complete absentees even when I called them to talk about their kids. And while I couldn't do that for all of them all the time, I did it a lot. I was never required to go to parent booster meetings, but I attended every one. I made a point to rotate parental chaperones on trips so as not to show favoritism and had a very good connection on the whole with my students' parents. The psychotics were few and far between, but of course memorable. The kind of parents who would complain to other audience members about the subject matter of songs during a performance, leave when their kid was done performing (no matter where it was in the concert or how much the kid wanted to hear his friends). Others would explode when I wouldn't give so-and-so a solo or mentioned anything that seemed odd about their children's behavior. Once I had to report an incident to CPS (teachers in Washington State are "mandated reporters" under state law) because the boy's sister had told me her mother had beaten him about the head with a mixing bowl. I later came to find out it was a plastic bowl, but that was the "last straw" for them. The next week, both kids were pulled out of that school and sent to a local Catholic school.

Mostly my experiences were very good with parents. About 25% complete support, 35% supportive apathy, 35% indifferent apathy and 5% nutjobs. Sometimes it can be an issue of age. I was a first-year teacher at 24, which is above average, considering most start at 22. Still, when the parents are older than you are, it's intimidating. That's why, especially in your first year, you've really got to seek them out and enlist their aid. It makes them feel involved and gets them on your side, plus you get insight into student behavior at home as well as ideas for calssroom management from parental stories about other teachers who have fared well with their kids (and the ones who blew it). I'd say it's about half-and-half on whether you'll get bias from a parent about their own kid, but I find that the best parents are honest and as objective as they can be.

I love teaching, so that helps, too. I love my subject, so there's another plus.

I hope this rambling answers at least one question. Perhaps some more specific parental relations questions could help focus my responses?

NdL

So I suppose, as liberal as I like to think I am, I'm conservative when it comes to school discipline. I'd LOVE to see school uniforms. I'd LOVE to see the return of corporal punishment. Not because I'm some kind of martinet, but because, believe it or not, fear helped keep the vast majority of us in line! I will NEVER forget Mr. Zinski's aerodynamically perfect spanking paddle. Holes drilled in a smooth, narrow and flat plank of maple with a leather-wrapped handle and NOTCHES IN THE SIDE! His class was quieter than church and twice as reverent. Nowdays, he'd be castigated and fired after parental outcry. "He can't spank MY child" -- well, he can if you can't impress upon the whelp the need for attention in class, or the need for respect of others and their property, or whatever school rules there are.
*LOL* Yup, you're a working teacher. It was funny/sad given how much my classmates and I, heading out into the classrooms swore we would not sound like the older teachers, how we would respect each child, and not complain... and how after 6 months we were all saying the same thing as you said.

And STILL get up each morning to go back to school because we still love those brats and teaching! (Teachers are insane, in case you were wondering)

For uniforms though, they don't help all that much. I'm currently teaching in a public junior high school in Japan, and we're forever yelling at the kids to get their seifuku (school uniform) right! And I still have many of the disapline problems I faced in an American junior high, just no guns.

There is something to be said about (and be thankful for) in the "lack of guns" part of your post....

So are you married to/marrying a Japanese woman? I'm jealous. I spent five weeks in Kobe way back in 1990, and would LOVE to go back. Just not in the dead of summer, as my singing group did. July 1 through August 12, 1990. There was something so surreal and more-than-scary about seeing Saddam's Kuwait invasion on NHK without translation and wondering just where the hell those tanks were going.

Mostly I loved the food, the people and the trains. If Seattle had trains like Kobe, I'd sell my car tomorrow. Miss one? Wait five minutes. Back then the Yen was 140 to the dollar, so that was fun. What is it now? 90? 95?

The saddest thing was the coverage of the 1995 Kobe earthquake and seeing many of the places I'd visited and even frequented, like Motomachi and Santica Town just shredded. I wish I'd had more than five weeks.

EDIT: I posted this in a fit of nostalgia before I realized that it'd be a massive thread-hijack. Sorry!

...Hitting a kid isn't useful in the long run. All you end up with is more bully mindsets.

Many kids (like myself) learn to shrug off pain. Remember, masochists exist.

Many teachers would fail to have the self-control required to not beat a child bloody with a paddle.

Imagine if favoritism in schools was extended to violence again.

And, later on in the school career, kids like me would respond to the paddle with a knee in the groin. Someone hits me, I'm going to hit them twice in return. That goes for any age.

Violence is bullshit, unless you enjoy Columbine setups.

No, the issue is parents being parents for once.

...Hitting a kid isn't useful in the long run. All you end up with is more bully mindsets.

Not if that kid grows up understanding why he was hit in the first place. Hitting in and of itself does nothing, and abuse is too much, but combined with other forms of punishment it makes a kid do a double-take. Back in the day a kid knew if they screwed up and did something inappropriate they could expect a couple of beatings. There is definitely a respect issue with today's youth, and I think the prospect of a whooping or real punishment from people a lot bigger than you definitely helps. Not every kid requires it but most do at some point.

Every successful association of individuals require discipline. If you know you can get away with something chances are you will do it.

Not if that kid grows up understanding why he was hit in the first place.


Big if. Psychological studies suggest that it's a pretty cruddy method for teaching 'why'.


Hitting in and of itself does nothing,


Which explains why, though my dad really wasn't that harsh with spankings when I was a kid, I've had dreams of cutting clones of him open with a sword, and didn't mind the idea very much growing up...

Of course, thankfully, if a teacher was to hit me, my dad would go and beat the hell out of that teacher himself. He knows how it feels, after all.

I can vouch myself, in fact. My first preschool teacher/principle (Private school) liked to use the hands-on approach to punishment. As such, I became deathly afraid of school. My parents took notice of this fairly quickly, and asked a cousin of mine (who happened to go to the same school, but was older) why I would be so absolutely terrified, considering how much I loved learning. They found out, and yanked me out of school, and I've been dealing with various social anxieties my entire life since. Come to think of it, it may explain a lot of my weird behavior over the years.

So hey, if you want to make more children scared to hell of school, and people in general...


and abuse is too much,


Abuse is damned nebulous. How will you define abuse in class?

They can't even keep pedophiles out of schools as it is.


but combined with other forms of punishment it makes a kid do a double-take.


Which is why kids back then never got in to trouble, did drugs, or anything else.

Just ignore history...


Back in the day a kid knew if they screwed up and did something inappropriate they could expect a couple of beatings.


So they learned to ignore pain, they learned how to threaten the teacher, or they learned how to be sneaky.

And then you have issues of the teacher making mistakes...


There is definitely a respect issue with today's youth,


Yeah. Like those damned American Revolutionaries not respecting the authority of the English.


and I think the prospect of a whooping or real punishment from people a lot bigger than you definitely helps.


Not every kid is so stupid that they can't figure out how to make yourself 'bigger' than the teachers.

Columbine had a nice collection of kids who made themselves bigger than everyone with a little bit of gun powder...


Not every kid requires it but most do at some point.


Yeah. Sure helped me through life, boy. Taking fifteen damn years to finally become semi-social, and having contempt for anyone claiming authority over me without my PERSONAL consent... yeah. You want to have more pissy anti-social people in the world.

Because the 60s and 70s were so respectful towards authority


Every successful association of individuals require discipline. If you know you can get away with something chances are you will do it.

Discipline through determination beats discipline through threat every time, unless you -want- a backlash, or screwed up people.

Gotta put the fear in'em and give strangers power over their asses. Great method.

Never enough runaways in the streets.

Education in the US is not global enough in scope. This produces a culture that knows very little about the outside world.

Other than that, however, there isn't much wrong with US education. US educational institutions consistently put out qualified graduates capable of competing with others from around the world. Specially in the fields of science, medicine, and engineering.

I have to agree with the saying of schools reflect the society the created them; the society does not reflect the schools. This is why 'fixing' the schools is just a cheap rallying cry of politicians and parents who cannot be bothered to actually educate themselves, or actually commit themselves, to what this really would mean. Instead they look for the 'quick' fix that can be done within one school year (better if done before election time of course) and one that requires next to no funding.

Those of an older persuasion of course wax nostalgic over their own school years, stating how if only youngsters today had grit, or were punished, or had to learn what THEY did, all would be well. This is highly amusing as the rules that bind teachers are a direct result of the rules that THEY themselves wrote. Teachers did not spend their time thinking of ways to change, society did that for us. As for the value of old knowledge and the return to the three Rs (The so-called back to basics movement) the curricula of old fails to address the needs of today. Doubt me? Please pull up your state's education standards (they're on your state's department of education's web page) and can you tell me, as an educated adult, that YOU can answer and meet all those standards now? Honestly now.

We hear of attack on tenure, but without an equivalent raise or benefit elsewhere. Teachers earn some of the lowest pay for a college educated person, period. A secondary teacher has pretty much majored in two separate fields (doubt me? Want to debate English lit for a while and then switch over to educational theorems?), while elementary teachers have to cover all fields, and today's kids are covering far more in their elementary school days than you did. What is to attract gifted and talented people to the teaching profession then if not job security? It ain't the pay (just as a note, I, holding a Master of Science in Ed, make more as an assistant English teacher in Japan on a program that doesn't care I HAVE the MS than I would as a teacher in my home state of Nevada with the MS, by about two thousand dollars). There is a serious teacher shortage in the United States right now, in many cases worse than the nursing shortage (if you have a teaching degree and a pulse and come anywhere near Las Vegas they come after you with nets). Most teachers are old, and will soon retire. Most young teachers quit after two years, unwilling to put up with the stress for the pay.

But the population of children in the US keeps growing and schools are opened up everyday. How do YOU plan to fill them with the best?

It has been said that teachers only work part of the year, this is not true. Teachers rarely have summers off. If we're not doing in-service training or preparing for next year; we're taking mandated classes to continue our education (or were you not aware that most states mandate that teachers must take a certain amount of college credits even while licensed teachers?). It is said we do not put in a full day's work, this IS true. We go beyond. We are there from around 7:30 in the morning (earlier in many cases) and if our contract ends at 4pm, we are there past that. Clubs, sports, supervising, chaperoning, and if you have a teacher for a friend, I am sure you have noticed that for social functions, like a little league game, they have brought papers to correct.

And this doesn't count the various side jobs teachers act as. How many times have teens, ignored at home, or scared out of their minds through abuse, have been caught by teachers? One of the teachers who inspired me to become a teacher told of a student who spent a semester camped out on her couch because he refused to go home due to fear that he father would kill him because he discovered he was gay.

Oh no, we work all the time.

Standardized testing you say? It would be nice if your children came to us in standardized packages. Alas, no. Each child is different and those standard tests never seem to catch that, not to mention they test for just 2% of the curricula.

But hey, let's make them the judge on if teachers get paid! I'm sure the 98% I would drop to feed my family wasn't all THAT important, right? And if your child happens to be gifted or talented in a direction that is not covered by these tests, I also rest assured that you will gladly forgo development of that talent, and us stuffing your child into a standardized box, to meet the goals of those tests. It has worked wonders for Japan after all.

In many ways, teachers face the same situation as military men and women, we go into it for love, we are highly trained, and we're not paid well. Also like the military, many people seem to account themselves as 'educational experts' (like armchair generals) due to the fact that they survived school, but nothing more. We just don't get holidays for our sacrifice.

And it would be a good day when schools got all that they wanted and the Air Force had to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.

How to fix the schools? GET INVLOVED! Go to your school board, meet with your child's teacher, volunteer, follow legislation and write your representatives about it. Hell, buy a damn cupcake at one of our damn bake sales! Most of all, understand this, you want good schools? You want schools to be proud of? You must change society first THAT will change the schools. The 'easy' way for that is when you become parents (if you're not already) install a love of learning in your child by showing learning in valuable. Read to your child and let your child see your face in his or her school. Become a part of your child's education and talk regularly with your child's teachers. Encourage those who would become teachers.

But, if that is too much for you, if you would rather to 'fix' the schools, then you have the schools you deserve. We mirror you, you do not mirror us.

Oh, and Intangelon? Kobe has been rebult and is beautiful again, if you ever go back. I've passed through there a number of times visiting my Japanese fiancee's hometown. But yeah, summer SUCKS!

My Public School curriculum, as far as graduating credits included:

2 Credits in Foreign Language (French, Japanese)
4 Elective credits (Band, Advanced and Wind Ensemble + 4 years of Marching Band and Jazz Band extra-curricular)
4 English Credits (9th - 12th)
3 Social Studies Credits (World History, AP US/Virginia History, US Government)
2 P.E./Health Credits
4 Science Credits (Earth Science, AP Chemistry, AP Physics A and B)
8 Math Credits (Pre-Algebra, Algebra I, Geomentry, Algebra II/Trig, Mathmatics Analysis, AP Calculus, AP Computer Science 1 and 2).

Total Credits needed to graduate:22, for a Govenors Diploma 24
Total Credits Achieved:26

AP Exams:
AP Chemistry: 4
AP Physics A(Trig Based): 5
AP Physics B(Calculus Based, Indepentant): 4
AP US/Virginia History: 5
AP Calculus: 5
AP Computer Science 1(USC Pascal): 5
AP Computer Science 2(C++, Independant): 5

Although male, I never considered it "uncool" nor did my peers consider it "uncool" to be "intelligent". My school, however, was in a very military area, and heavily academic in nature.

I used my school background, and did 6 years in the US Navy as a Combat Systems Technician on submarines (Firecontrol Technician/FT), leaving as an E-6 (Petty Officer First Class)/(FT1/SS).

After my stint in the Navy, I combined my aquired college credits from AP exams + my naval school curriculum in Advanced Electronics, Micro-minerature soldering, and Digital and Semiconductor theory; towards degree work for a BA and subsequent Masters in Electronics Engineering

[blah blah blah]


Thats nice, but do you have any comments on the education system of the US? This isnt the autobiography thread.

Not if that kid grows up understanding why he was hit in the first place. Hitting in and of itself does nothing, and abuse is too much, but combined with other forms of punishment it makes a kid do a double-take. Back in the day a kid knew if they screwed up and did something inappropriate they could expect a couple of beatings. There is definitely a respect issue with today's youth, and I think the prospect of a whooping or real punishment from people a lot bigger than you definitely helps. Not every kid requires it but most do at some point.

Every successful association of individuals require discipline. If you know you can get away with something chances are you will do it.


How is it that properly trained people can teach self harming autistic kids effectively without using CP?

If the kids hit the teacher it's assault, pure and simple. That should remain a reciprocal arrangement.

Thats nice, but do you have any comments on the education system of the US? This isnt the autobiography thread.

I see you have given yourself a very appropriate name... Maybe I should add that to my list....
Here it is for the Lazy types!

I'm a "he", but don't tell my mother, she'd be so disappointed.

...The kind of parents who would complain to other audience members about the subject matter of songs during a performance, leave when their kid was done performing (no matter where it was in the concert or how much the kid wanted to hear his friends)...



I remember people like that in my high school. I always wanted to slap them for walking out. My band/chorus teachers would end the concert with a joint piece just so everyone would HAVE to stay. All in all, that was helpful. I don't particularly have tons of specific questions that I can think of, but thank you for responding.

And I find it pretty ironic that I'm talking in an online forum about education instead of studing for my education final tomorrow...

I've always loved irony.

Here is another take:

May 8, 2005
School Accountability Accounting
by Neal McCluskey

"Public accountability" is what we get from public schools, and what we would lose if parents could choose their child's school, especially private schools.
Government schools, we're essentially warned, are all that stand between us and academic anarchy akin to philosopher Thomas Hobbes' "state of nature," a "war... of every man against every man" in which life is "nasty, brutish, and short."
But public accountability has failed to erect a wall around the state of nature. Instead of keeping corruption and marauders at bay, poor parents and their children, as well as taxpayers who pay for the schools, have been locked into failure and corruption. Every day, around the country, the news makes this obvious. Consider just a few recent examples:
The Arizona Republic April 19 ran an editorial about the Colorado City, Ariz., school district, where a "polygamous cult" calling itself the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints controls the Colorado City District School Board, which bought a $220,000 private plane while going more than $1.5 million in debt and issuing rubber checks to its teachers."
An April 12 Associated Press article about New Orleans school superintendent Anthony Amato's resignation noted Mr. Amato was leaving "after more than two stormy years in the post, during which the school system lost millions of dollars, federal officials investigated allegations of corruption and test scores remained among the worst in the state." In Mr. Amato's defense, the article noted financial problems and corruption were rampant long before he arrived in the Big Easy.
According to an April 11 Denver Post article, tiny Elizabeth, Colo., is still getting over several years when "a $300 cellphone, self-help books, catered parties and secret bonuses were among the goodies principals and administrators gave themselves. All the while, the school system was racing toward a budget crisis."
Finally, there's Roslyn, Long Island, in New York, where in March a state audit revealed district officials had stolen $11.2 million from the schools, spending it on everything from cars to Concorde flights.
For the people of Colorado City, New Orleans, Elizabeth and Roslyn, public accountability has clearly failed. Indeed, in each case the culprits behind the corruption were superintendents, principals, administrators and school boards -- the very people entrusted with providing accountability.
Unfortunately, there are very few studies of public school corruption, forcing us to use mainly anecdotal evidence, like the outrages above, to conclude public accountability is a sham.
Recently, though, Lydia Segal, a criminal law professor and former special counsel to the special commissioner of investigation for the New York City schools, shed a little more light on how corruption takes hold. In Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools she explains that far from protecting the integrity of public education, huge bureaucracies have "eroded oversight, discouraged managers from focusing on performance, and made it so difficult to do business with districts that employees and contractors have sometimes had to seek 'creative' or illicit ways to get their jobs done."
Corroborating Ms. Segal's findings is Making Schools Work by University of California-Los Angeles professor William Ouchi, a book on which Ms. Segal collaborated. Based on observations of many school organizations, from centralized districts like New York City to independent schools, Mr. Ouchi finds autonomy, not bureaucracy, is the key to success.
It's not a new realization. In 1990, researchers John Chubb and Terry Moe came to the same conclusion in Politics, Markets, and America's Schools, and offered an answer to our woes: school choice, they said -- letting parents and children out of the accountability pen -- was the key to fixing U.S. education.
Unfortunately, though we know the "public accountability" on which we've counted so long doesn't work, whenever choice is proposed those who have a stake in the status quo block it. Where's the accountability, they ask. The reply is simple: While no system will ever be totally free of corruption, the best accountability comes from freeing every parent to select the schools that work well, and to escape those that betray their trust. In other words, the opposite of today's "accountability."
--
Neal McCluskey is a Cato Institute education fellow.
This article appeared in the Washington Times April 24, 2005.

I have to agree with the saying of schools reflect the society the created them; the society does not reflect the schools. This is why 'fixing' the schools is just a cheap rallying cry of politicians and parents who cannot be bothered to actually educate themselves, or actually commit themselves, to what this really would mean. Instead they look for the 'quick' fix that can be done within one school year (better if done before election time of course) and one that requires next to no funding.

[quote]Those of an older persuasion of course wax nostalgic over their own school years, stating how if only youngsters today had grit, or were punished, or had to learn what THEY did, all would be well. This is highly amusing as the rules that bind teachers are a direct result of the rules that THEY themselves wrote.Not exactly true. Those that decry the condition of schools and "wax nostalgic" would never have allowed the crap their kids were force-fed if they had had the chance. Teachers did not spend their time thinking of ways to change, society did that for us. Or the Union... But you are correct - and I don't blame the "teachers" for it, I blame "professional educators".

As for the value of old knowledge and the return to the three Rs (The so-called back to basics movement) the curricula of old fails to address the needs of today. Doubt me? Please pull up your state's education standards (they're on your state's department of education's web page) and can you tell me, as an educated adult, that YOU can answer and meet all those standards now? Honestly now. Why do those "standards" exist? Because some "professional educator" decided that X was more important than the ability to spell.

We hear of attack on tenure, but without an equivalent raise or benefit elsewhere. Teachers earn some of the lowest pay for a college educated person, period. A secondary teacher has pretty much majored in two separate fields (doubt me? Want to debate English lit for a while and then switch over to educational theorems?), while elementary teachers have to cover all fields, and today's kids are covering far more in their elementary school days than you did. What is to attract gifted and talented people to the teaching profession then if not job security? It ain't the pay (just as a note, I, holding a Master of Science in Ed, make more as an assistant English teacher in Japan on a program that doesn't care I HAVE the MS than I would as a teacher in my home state of Nevada with the MS, by about two thousand dollars). There is a serious teacher shortage in the United States right now, in many cases worse than the nursing shortage (if you have a teaching degree and a pulse and come anywhere near Las Vegas they come after you with nets). Most teachers are old, and will soon retire. Most young teachers quit after two years, unwilling to put up with the stress for the pay. Also unwilling to have a (large) portion of their salary mandatorily removed by the NEA and its subsidiaries for questionable political activities that have little if nothing to do with actual salaries & benefits.

But the population of children in the US keeps growing and schools are opened up everyday. How do YOU plan to fill them with the best?

It has been said that teachers only work part of the year, this is not true. Teachers rarely have summers off. If we're not doing in-service training or preparing for next year; we're taking mandated classes to continue our education (or were you not aware that most states mandate that teachers must take a certain amount of college credits even while licensed teachers?).
Then why is there such a hue and outcry any time Teacher Testing is suggested?

It is said we do not put in a full day's work, this IS true. We go beyond. We are there from around 7:30 in the morning (earlier in many cases) and if our contract ends at 4pm, we are there past that. Clubs, sports, supervising, chaperoning, and if you have a teacher for a friend, I am sure you have noticed that for social functions, like a little league game, they have brought papers to correct.

And this doesn't count the various side jobs teachers act as. How many times have teens, ignored at home, or scared out of their minds through abuse, have been caught by teachers? One of the teachers who inspired me to become a teacher told of a student who spent a semester camped out on her couch because he refused to go home due to fear that he father would kill him because he discovered he was gay.

Oh no, we work all the time.

[quote]Standardized testing you say? It would be nice if your children came to us in standardized packages. Alas, no. Each child is different and those standard tests never seem to catch that, not to mention they test for just 2% of the curricula.

But hey, let's make them the judge on if teachers get paid!
I'm sure the 98% I would drop to feed my family wasn't all THAT important, right? And if your child happens to be gifted or talented in a direction that is not covered by these tests, I also rest assured that you will gladly forgo development of that talent, and us stuffing your child into a standardized box, to meet the goals of those tests. It has worked wonders for Japan after all.
No, I think they should be used to judge the overall performance of a district/system. Since Testing students is (obviously) not an objective way of testing the skill set of a teacher, it is the TEACHER who should be tested. You can't tell me there isn't a lot of dead weight out there that shouldn't be teaching. (You know the type, the ones who got into teaching to become Principals, Administrators and other "professional educators".

In many ways, teachers face the same situation as military men and women, we go into it for love, we are highly trained, and we're not paid well. Also like the military, many people seem to account themselves as 'educational experts' (like armchair generals) due to the fact that they survived school, but nothing more. We just don't get holidays for our sacrifice.Those "armchair generals" run your union and write the (effective) national curricula, focusing on important skills like having "Zero Tolerance (http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/zerostup.html)". Clean your own house.

And it would be a good day when schools got all that they wanted and the Air Force had to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.Pithy, but problamatic.

In 2001, public expenditure for education at all levels comprised 4.8 percent of GDP in the United States (http://www.oclc.org/membership/escan/economic/educationlibraryspending.htm)

In 2001, public expenditure for the US Military at all levels comprised 3.0 percent of GDP in the United States (http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php)

1.8% of the US GDP will buy a lot of bombers... :rolleyes:

The US ranks SECOND world-wide in per-capita spending on education, but is nowhere near the upper quartile in test scores. Why?

How to fix the schools? GET INVLOVED! Go to your school board, meet with your child's teacher, volunteer, follow legislation and write your representatives about it. Hell, buy a damn cupcake at one of our damn bake sales! Most of all, understand this, you want good schools? You want schools to be proud of? You must change society first THAT will change the schools. The 'easy' way for that is when you become parents (if you're not already) install a love of learning in your child by showing learning in valuable. Read to your child and let your child see your face in his or her school. Become a part of your child's education and talk regularly with your child's teachers. Encourage those who would become teachers.
All good things to do, right along with re-instituting/reinforcing the importance of "the 3 Rs" and dumping all the political/social engineering.

But, if that is too much for you, if you would rather to 'fix' the schools, then you have the schools you deserve. We mirror you, you do not mirror us.The school systems mirror the political will of the "professional educators" that try to run them at our expense with no accountability or competition. They do not mirror me.

Oh, and Intangelon? Kobe has been rebult and is beautiful again, if you ever go back. I've passed through there a number of times visiting my Japanese fiancee's hometown. But yeah, summer SUCKS!
I like Iwama...

Not exactly true. Those that decry the condition of schools and "wax nostalgic" would never have allowed the crap their kids were force-fed if they had had the chance.Or the Union... But you are correct - and I don't blame the "teachers" for it, I blame "professional educators".
Teachers ARE professional educators. To deny them that is insulting. I am as much a professional as anyone else. The days when teaching colleges were somehow ‘lesser’ and those who can’t, teach is long since gone, and thank goodness. But most of the rules that bind teachers were not created by teachers unions; they were mandated by the state or come from court decisions. As my educational law professor was so fond of stating, most rules and regulations come from the great school board that meets in the capital every so often.

Why do those "standards" exist? Because some "professional educator" decided that X was more important than the ability to spell.
Again, I would ask you, have you LOOKED at your state standards? Spelling is in there, I have yet to encounter a state without it. I am not sure of your state (I assume Illinois) but here are the standards for Nevada, http://www.doe.nv.gov/sca/standards/standardsfiles/ela/elacont.html, and surprise, spelling is in there. Alas, standards were written with teacher input, but the final decision on what is in there and how it is written in state and local school boards, all of whom are elected/appointed and rarely contain teachers (see Kansas’s current debate).

Also unwilling to have a (large) portion of their salary mandatorily removed by the NEA and its subsidiaries for questionable political activities that have little if nothing to do with actual salaries & benefits.
Ah, the good old anti-union argument. I’m not the world’s biggest fan of the union, but here are a few facts for you. The NEA’s main function right now is to provide insurance for teachers. See, by law, a teacher must carry what amounts to malpractice insurance. Currently this policy is around $1,000,000 (US). Mainly used when and if a teacher is sued. Most districts, especially in poorer rural areas, cannot even begin to cover their teachers. The NEA does. Again, each state is different, but Nevada requires teachers to have this insurance before you’re allowed to step into that classroom. Also, and again, each state is different, many states, by law, do not allow teachers to actually strike.

Then why is there such a hue and outcry any time Teacher Testing is suggested?
It’s probably due to the fact that we are tested, repeatedly. I was tested before I was admitted to teacher education, and tested again when I left. After a semester of student teaching (unpaid, by the way), you are tested on your subject knowledge and methodology before being granted your license and endorsements (The subjects and grade levels you are allowed to teach). Even tenure is not an automatic process. It doesn’t just happen. You are on probation for two years, during which time school administrators and your lead teacher checks on your lesson plans, classroom manners, and everything else BEFORE you are granted tenure. A down check is the end of your time as a teacher. How much more testing do you want?

Part of it is also that the testing that most folks would want us teachers to take is more standardized tests, which again is just a waste of our already overbooked time. A much better method is that of master teacher licensure, which requires a teaching portfolio, a number of hours in the classroom, review by a panel of other master teachers, and self video and evaluation. But since such practices takes so much time, and money, guess what the Great School Boards do NOT wish to have us do? Not when just getting a teacher to take a pen and pencil test is so much easier and cheaper (and no one has ever explained to me how a scantron shows off my teaching ability and classroom skills. Maybe how I fill in the little bubbles?).

No, I think they should be used to judge the overall performance of a district/system. Since Testing students is (obviously) not an objective way of testing the skill set of a teacher, it is the TEACHER who should be tested. You can't tell me there isn't a lot of dead weight out there that shouldn't be teaching. (You know the type, the ones who got into teaching to become Principals, Administrators and other "professional educators".
There is a lot of deadweight, God knows there is. But again, please see above and you tell me how you think teachers should be tested again. And then please tell me how you plan to pay for that.

Those "armchair generals" run your union and write the (effective) national curricula, focusing on important skills like having "Zero Tolerance (http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/zerostup.html)". Clean your own house.
The national curricula (which doesn’t exist, there are national standards) were written by the US Department of Education. Considering that the last Secretary of Education called the NEA, and the teachers who belong to it, terrorists, you can hardly say that they are a part of the DoEd. Even better, when the Bush Administration was looking at education in gearing up to introduce No Child Left Behind, the working committee that reported to the President to state the needs American education and educators included the presidents of Shell and Texaco. Strangely enough, no teachers, but I am sure President Bush asked his wife about it, right?

Zero Tolerance by the way, was dreamed up in the wake of a rash of school shootings and mandated, again, by Congress. It’s a very silly law, but it is also the law of the land till they change it and we’re just required to follow it. And while we might not like it, the hue and outcry of Columbine and other incidences where we were damned for not following it has made the boards overly cautious. To quote Kipling, “Its Tommy do this, and Tommy do that, and Tommy go take a walk!”

Pithy, but problamatic.

In 2001, public expenditure for education at all levels comprised 4.8 percent of GDP in the United States (http://www.oclc.org/membership/escan/economic/educationlibraryspending.htm)

In 2001, public expenditure for the US Military at all levels comprised 3.0 percent of GDP in the United States (http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php)

1.8% of the US GDP will buy a lot of bombers... :rolleyes:

The US ranks SECOND world-wide in per-capita spending on education, but is nowhere near the upper quartile in test scores. Why?
Well, I cannot state anything but according to the US Budget for FY 2005, the budget for education was (in the millions of dollars) 57,339. For the Department of Defense, not counting the emergency loans requested for the wars, it was (millions of dollars) 401,919. You can check yourself: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/browse.html

What I will state is that schools often times have out modeled and outdated equipment, especially in terms technology and science. Textbooks are often outdated as well. But you don’t see national news stories on how a school in rural Nevada is still teaching with textbooks that are ten years old, but you do see the military screaming over substandard equipment. Not to shaft the military here, but schools are under funded and teachers are scrambling to find the equipment they need, often times out of their own funding. Again, schools are having to cut art and music programs, but somehow the United States can build a multi-billion dollar aircraft carrier.

I also call to your attention that you are looking at percentages of the GDNP, which is ok, except that your numbers do not state one problem with looking at just the totals spent, the number served. How many men and women in uniform are there versus how many students are there? How many bases, ships, planes, and equipment versus how many schools, equipment, buses, and so on? A MUCH better comparison would be a how many dollars per head, troops and students, are spent, one is much lower than the other, and it’s not the military.

All good things to do, right along with re-instituting/reinforcing the importance of "the 3 Rs" and dumping all the political/social engineering.
The three R’s ARE being taught, they were never abandoned, as much as people like to claim. But they are hardly the whole of the curriculum, nor will they pass muster for everything. They are a part, but not the whole. There’s a lot more that needs to be covered and taught that the 3 R’s never touch. And again, political and social engineering are an effect of pressures on schools, we didn’t think of these things for the fun of them one day in the teacher’s lounge. But I would ask you what your definition of these projects are?

The school systems mirror the political will of the "professional educators" that try to run them at our expense with no accountability or competition. They do not mirror me.
No, they do. You do vote for your legislature and governor, do you not? You do vote for your state and local school boards, do you not? You vote for bond issues regarding schools do you not? You vote for all those who are setting the rules, and you write them. As a society, you also set the values that we have to teach, and you provide us with the students whom we will teach, with their attitudes towards education. You set that, we didn’t. We weren’t there for the first 5 years, you were. No, schools mirror YOU. You as a society and a nation.

As you said, fix your own house, for schools are a part of it, THEN we’ll be fixed at the same time.

I like Iwama...
I haven't been there yet, where is it?

What's the problem with education in America?"

I assume you are speaking of public education. Problem being govn't funded.. trying to give equal education to all.. Not going to work. Some cannot keep up nor even comprehend what some other students can.

America has some good schools.. but they aren't "public".

But.. I must say..it's the student in question. For them to really be schooled.. they have to have the desire to learn.. and those usually go outside whatever they are taught no matter where, to find other conclusions .. answers.. in the main stream society... this does not happen.

First of all, kudos to NERVUN for his excellent posts. Additionally, as a college student in Nevada, I can sympathize with the pressures that Nevadans put on their school teachers.

That being said, I am not entirely sure that a "problem" exists in the aggragate in the American education system. The American system certainly has its problems, but on the whole, it does a very good job of teaching the average student a wide variety of things about a wide variety of subjects.

Now of course, this flies in the face of several old saws about education. One is the notion that we are falling behind in testing when compared to other industrialized nations. The second is the rise of remedial education in the college system, an effect of the decline of the American high school education system (or so the Las Vegas Review Journal editorial board would have you believe). The third is the traditional argument, also known as the "back in my day" argument, where the education system is invariably maligned when compared with the expertise provided by the education system of yesteryear.

The problem with each of these arguments is that they are usually making apples-and-oranges comparisons by comparing completely different educational systems. Take for instance the argument about how American students are falling further and further behind in test scores when compared, for example, with Chinese and Korean students. The number one reason why our 17-year old students don't test as well as Korean 17-year olds has nothing to do with the degree of intelligence or training between the two; it has to do with the fact that only the top 10% of students in Korea are still being trained in the "standard" system by the time they are 17. The rest have either dropped out, are working at a burger joint, or are in trade schools. America is the only nation in the world that makes the commitment to ensure that every student, no matter what their economic background or intellectual ability, recieves 12 years of education. Call me crazy, but if you put it that way, America is not at a disadvantage. They are also not necessarily indicative of a "failing" educational system: I went to high school in rural Idaho, yet I'd be willing to bet that if you tested my high school debate squad against the average sampling of Koreans taking those tests, we would kick their asses.

The same goes for the other two arguments. The primary reason why remedial education is now taught at UNLV or CCSN in Nevada isn't because schools have fallen from some lofty perch, it's because 50 years ago only 2% of all Americans graduated with a degree; today the number is 25%. So all things being equal, the schools have seen a better than twelvefold increase in the number of students being educated. Anyone familiar with hydraulics would tell you that you decrease motive force as you increase the diameter of the container you push your water through, and the same thing is true in education. More students means less selectivity in who gets in, which means greater likelihood that someone might get in who has problems with his grammar. But if the real solution to the problem is to restrict access to college, then we may simply not want to make the tradeoff, as mass education was one of the main reasons for our economic boom in the 50's and 60's as WWII vets took advantage of the G.I. Bill.

As for the relative quality of education 50 years ago as compared to today, I'm apparently the only one who remembers that 50 years ago we didn't educate a substantial portion of our population. Even in 1955, if you were black, Hispanic, immigrant, poor, or rural, odds were pretty good that you'd be lucky to get 8 years of education, not the mandatory 12 we see today. Put that way, that our education system is still struggling to incorporate the people that we didn't bother with even 50 years ago, I would say that our education system has done, pardon the expression, a fanf-intastic job of trying to integrate them into our larger society.

Now that doesn't mean that there can't be improvements on the system. Our schools today typically last around 6 hours per day of instruction, whereas 50 years ago they averaged around 8. So we might want to consider a lengthening of the school day. We might also consider changing the school schedule from our current system, which is based on an agricultural makeup that simply doesn't apply for most students. We might also consider a change from the current property tax model of school funding, which tends to punish those who grow up in poor neighborhoods. All these are possibilities worthy of consideration. That does not mean, however, that the U.S. system of education needs to be ripped apart and reconstructed from the ground up.

--snippington--


Thank you, thank you, THANK you!

You said everything that I wanted to say but was too tired to last night. I got sidetracked by focusing on my substitute days and the horrors lurking within middle school/junior high halls. Think about that age group always seduces me into wanting corporal punishment back. Everything you said PLUS a student body of jello-brained, quasi-formed neither adolescents nor children so wracked with hormones they have a hard time walking straight would equal a middle school teacher. Just surviving that age group for ten years should win you the purple heart. Should you survive to retirement and be sorely missed when you leave? Congressional Medal of Honor.

I get hung up on discipline and respect because it seems that no matter how much you show them, it's never even noticed, let alone returned. I realize that means that I, too, must analyze my behavior and expectations and style, but I wish the kids would -- or have parents more concerned about things like that.

Anyway, extremely well said and bravo (and thanks for the Kobe update). :)

--snipple--
For the people of Colorado City, New Orleans, Elizabeth and Roslyn, public accountability has clearly failed. Indeed, in each case the culprits behind the corruption were superintendents, principals, administrators and school boards -- the very people entrusted with providing accountability.
--sniptacular--

I swear, something happens to teachers who become administrators. True, I don't know all who've made that transition, and I'm sure some go through it and prosper without becoming corrupt or co-opted, but it seems that the DEd. (or other admin-type degree) sheepskin contains some sort of psychoactive resin that turns admins' brains to clam sauce. Forever buying in to one "new" system after another or standing by old ones that have clearly imploded. Making decisions without consulting parents, or where appropriate, students. Treating students like property instead of people. These are the administrators that I have seen, and do not get me started on school boards.

But Syniks' post has shown me that it's worse and more pervasive than I had thought. However, just two days ago north of Seattle, in Marysville, a ray of light was seen.

A parent came to pick up her daughter dressed in a backless spaghetti-strap tank top which was in violation of the elementary school's dress code -- WHICH WAS IN EVERY PARENTS' POSSESSION AND CLEARLY STATED THAT ALL STAFF AND PARENTS WERE TO ABIDE BY IT AS WELL. The principal saw this woman on campus and asked her to comply with the policy and leave the school. This woman actually made it to the Seattle TV news (it is May sweeps, after all), and the front page of the regional newpaper comlaining about the principal's "ridiculous" ruling. Thing is, the policy has been in place for ten years, and this woman's was the first and only complaint about it.

I say CONGRATULATIONS to the principal for ensuring that hypocrisy isn't something that gets taught in Marysville.

NERVUN, Intangelon, & Xenophobialand,

Please let me point out that I in no way intended, or intimated that Teachers are NOT professional educators. I thought I was clear in saying that the problem was with "Professional Educators" that are not Teachers. This largely includes School System Administrators, Political Hacks and "armchair quarterbacks" that have a say in what goes into Curricula.

As you point out, the percentage GDP vs. Federal Dollars spent is an apples to oranges comparison, but since the military has a "single point" funding source and education is funded through a variety of local taxes, it is the only way to do it. Likewise the "per head" cost is an apples to oranges comparison, since troops have salaries and students don't.

Despite the two valid raisons d'etre for the NEA (insurance and collective barganing) you cannot say that the NEA is NOT a political advocacy group - one which weilds a pretty big stick in political circles. This IS a point of contention to many teachers who see their mandatory dues being used to fight for political causes and candidates in which (whom) they do not believe. Many of these political causes are the root of absurd programs that take valuable education dollars away from education and use them for various social engineering schemes.

I largely agree with Xenophobialand's points, but do think that, while sociologically "fantastic", the net result of much of the social integration programs HAVE had a detrimental effect on the ability of naturally gifted students (of whatever ethnicity) to excell - especially with the advent of "outcome-based education" (in which IMO the only desired "outcome" is one where everyone is equally un(der)educated - lest we hurt someone's feelings...)

Case in point: In 1976 I left a "tracked" or "self-paced" program at a school in Illinois for a school that had a "standardized" curriculum and advancement schedule. In the 4th grade, I had been doing 6th & 7th grade work and was reading at the "12th grade" level. I had no "socialization" type classes yet had an active peer/social life. The following year, at the new school, I found myself sandbagged to the point of stupifaction. Even in the "5th grade" I could not believe how intractable the new system was and how unwilling most of the teachers were to letting me progress. With very few exceptional exceptions who found it in their job description to try to challange me (and I love them dearly for it), most of my "teachers" were more than content to let me effectively sleep through the next 8 years of school. Oh, and those nonsense "socialization" classes that the new school was trying out? Useless. Worse than that, because of their insistance on the equality of outcomes, I was virtually held to pariah status and, as a result, had almost NO social/peer life, save to be beaten for being a "nerd".

So, "fixing" education, IMO means letting failure fail and success succeed, and seperate the two - as quickly as possible. "Equality of Outcomes" (oh lookie, we have 6 "Valedictorians", none of whom took AP classes) is deadly to the joy of learning and intellictual rigor.