Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The feds say thou shall educate. When I was in school disruptive behavior and the stuff associated with it was not allowed. The student was banned from that school after the third time. The student that punched the pregnanat teacher went to jail. Chicago is saddled wih a massive school system that is out of control and broken.
Smaller districts have separate schools for the disruptive with a very rigid set of rules. When that fails, they are out of the school system. Some go to jail, some go into the DCFS, some get their GED, some go to college and some die. The point is they are not in the school system or allowed on school grounds.
As a nation we can do better. The problem lies with DC. One set of rules does not fit every school and every district in every state in America.
A better policy is to form regions of 4 states and let the 4 District Superintendents work out what is best for their region. Let them meet the Supers from 5 other regions to further define it. .Now there are two super regions representing 48 states. It is up to the 24 in each region to find the best course of action/solutions for their super region. The hardest job will the last step. Bringing the two ideas together to form a consus that treats equally all of the school issues that School Superintendents face every day: poverty, languages, behavior, failing teachers, failing schools, bullies, weather, old books, old classrooms and overcrowding, sports, music, arts, equal funding for all schools, breakfast and lunch programs, sick kids, drugs, booze, after school activities, discipline, etc.. The list is long and endless.
But you have to start by removing disruptive behavior from school permanently. The ACLU will scream.
We could probably create a model system that works. The problem is where to start and how. DC is not answer. The real answer lies in boots on the ground; the people who live it.
I think that's a good way to drive everyone insane. Schools have to focus on one thing: education. They can't conquer poverty, drugs, booze, teenage pregnancy, the whole "long and endless" list. They can't be all things to all suffering students. That's where the greater community, churches, and other systems come in to play. To ask schools (or teachers) to ameloriate all the ills of the world for disadvantaged students is asking too much.
Its crazy. We had our class disruptors too but the level of disrespect nowadays is unreal. At least back then, the teachers could snatch you up but now EVERYBODY is scared of the kids. Is it a result of poverty or our sue-happy, dontsayanythingtomykid-centric culture? Who knows. I guess if I knew I could go to class and act like a jackass with no consequences, I would do it day in, day out too lol (this is my 10 yr old self talking). None of the adults have power or authority anymore and the kids know it.
I went to cps elementary and high schools during the height of the crack era and when the murder rates were at their highest in chicago (thank God we didn't have youtube or heavy media focus back then). But even then, you could get support from somewhere. The saving grace for a lot of my peers were the teachers and principals (the ones that actually cared and there were more of them) and the guidance counselors (we actually had them back then). We also used to actually have truant officers back then so if you were caught ditching, you would at least be driven back to school. We even had crossing guards that couldn't wait to tell on us lol. We had way more supportive and educational afterschool programs and libraries too. So even if the school curriculum was weak, you could still supplement it elsewhere. We used to have book fairs and book clubs at school (shout out to Ramona Quimby and Encyclopedia Brown). Ok I'm getting carried away with the memories...My point is as bad as things were back then, it felt like we had more resources we could reach out to.
I think this is the right idea...test scores and college prep have to take a back seat to basic life skills, sex-ed, etc. Kids having kids is a huge reason why this cycle is so hard to break.
Stopping girls from getting pregnant before they want to would probably solve SO many of our city's problems (education, violence, etc). This kind of change has to be a cultural one--since all the teens are having sex, birth control should be a huge push in communities. That way motherhood (and fatherhood perhaps) can be delayed until people are a little better prepared. Part of that can start in school.
If he said that - it is rather interesting for several reasons:
1. I agree with the statement. A significant portion of the students (and their families) really don't care about education and they are just negatives to everyone else. If you thrown money at the problem it won't change at all.
2. It goes against typical Democrat/liberal positions that refuse to acknowledge that some people are just not worth the investment.
3. If 25 percent will amount to nothing, what does Emanuel suggest will happen to these people? How will it affect Chicago 5, 10, 15 years from now?
Well, assuming he did say that (I agree w/ an earlier point that Karen Lewis is far from 100% trustworthy), an assuming he meant that these kids wouldn't excel at school or pass all these tests, I guess I would ask what would be the issue w/ this. Several decades ago, many of the people who fell into this 25% would have worked blue collar jobs n factories where one didn't need an extensive education. They would have worked in the service industry and become the cashiers, burger flippers, cab drivers, mechanics, and barbers to the other 75%. These days, there is WAY too much focus on getting kids to be "college ready". Some people will NEVER be college ready, not unless we're talking about "colleges" like for-profit schools that are in it for the money. Truth be told, I'd start questioning if certain people really need to be educated beyond the 10th grade. Why not have those students who won't make it on a college track look into trades? Of course, there are few blue collar jobs (especially of the sort that could net you a decent lower middle-middle class existence), most service jobs are being taken up be immigrants, and even now you're seeing college educated people also applying for these jobs out of desperation. Until some sort of employment can be provided to those people who just aren't competent enough for college, or even able to get through all 4 years of high school, issues will remain and a lot of those people will either resort to crime or become lifelong dependents of government aid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonPanther
A hypothetical scenario here...
Are school systems across the USA built on a model that assumes kids will have parental participation in their education? Meaning, a parent who can help you with your homework, who will help you build a diorama, who will make your costume for you? And if you do not have a parent that helps you, you cannot succeed?
I am not talking about abusive parents, disruptive classrooms, none of that. Assume the parent gives the kid time to do homework, but does not assist in any way. I am asking a simple question - Can a typical kid who has non-participant parents succeed in the USA classroom?
I don't think you need parental participation to succeed. I think some of it has to do more with the kid than the parents. Kids with an internal drive to learn will eventually break away from negative, anti-education parents who never gave them an external push, provided that they're getting a pro-education message from somewhere else (e.g., teachers, mentors, even TV can help in that matter). Everyone has heard of stories of kids who grew up in broken homes, with abusive, neglectful, drug abusing parents who somehow managed to beat the odds and go on to college. Heck, my own parents were functioning illiterates and I managed to test into one of the top high schools in MA. As much as I'd like to attribute that to my parents, I know they didn't make as great of an impact as my teachers and mentors did simply due to lack of ability and time (each worked 10-12 hours a day). I know a lot of kids who grew up in poor, immigrant families that didn't actively participate in their schooling as you mention, and those kids often excelled in their studies.
Well, assuming he did say that (I agree w/ an earlier point that Karen Lewis is far from 100% trustworthy), an assuming he meant that these kids wouldn't excel at school or pass all these tests, I guess I would ask what would be the issue w/ this. Several decades ago, many of the people who fell into this 25% would have worked blue collar jobs n factories where one didn't need an extensive education. They would have worked in the service industry and become the cashiers, burger flippers, cab drivers, mechanics, and barbers to the other 75%. These days, there is WAY too much focus on getting kids to be "college ready". Some people will NEVER be college ready, not unless we're talking about "colleges" like for-profit schools that are in it for the money. Truth be told, I'd start questioning if certain people really need to be educated beyond the 10th grade. Why not have those students who won't make it on a college track look into trades? Of course, there are few blue collar jobs (especially of the sort that could net you a decent lower middle-middle class existence), most service jobs are being taken up be immigrants, and even now you're seeing college educated people also applying for these jobs out of desperation. Until some sort of employment can be provided to those people who just aren't competent enough for college, or even able to get through all 4 years of high school, issues will remain and a lot of those people will either resort to crime or become lifelong dependents of government aid.
I agree with much of this. We currently over-emphasize college. I think this is one of the early dominoes that falls to create too much college debt, rising tuition costs, and too many college graduates with worthless degrees. I am sorry but you do not have an automatic right to "pursue my dream" if that dream is an art history degree where you will work as an educated waiter with no ability to repay your loans. There is a shortage of skilled workers (such as machinists) in the US where the pay is damn good - over $50K and reaching much higher.
Quote:
I don't think you need parental participation to succeed. I think some of it has to do more with the kid than the parents. Kids with an internal drive to learn will eventually break away from negative, anti-education parents who never gave them an external push, provided that they're getting a pro-education message from somewhere else (e.g., teachers, mentors, even TV can help in that matter). Everyone has heard of stories of kids who grew up in broken homes, with abusive, neglectful, drug abusing parents who somehow managed to beat the odds and go on to college. Heck, my own parents were functioning illiterates and I managed to test into one of the top high schools in MA. As much as I'd like to attribute that to my parents, I know they didn't make as great of an impact as my teachers and mentors did simply due to lack of ability and time (each worked 10-12 hours a day). I know a lot of kids who grew up in poor, immigrant families that didn't actively participate in their schooling as you mention, and those kids often excelled in their studies.
I don't think you need parental participation, but over the general population the data shows that educated parents have educated kids. The stories about kids rising out of their broken homes are terrific, but there aren't a lot of those stories. When they happen they make a movie about it. I think most children are heavily influenced by their parents and home life, for better or worse.
It will never be insane to have a national policy that treats education and schools equally. You will never find it in an office in DC.. Today you don't have equality in Chicago or anywhere else.
What you have is more poverty and reduced funding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
I think that's a good way to drive everyone insane. Schools have to focus on one thing: education. They can't conquer poverty, drugs, booze, teenage pregnancy, the whole "long and endless" list. They can't be all things to all suffering students. That's where the greater community, churches, and other systems come in to play. To ask schools (or teachers) to ameloriate all the ills of the world for disadvantaged students is asking too much.
Interesting you say that. My thought is that if kids are acting up, not doing well, not doing their work and their parents aren't involved, they don't get to come to school.
Chicago is my home and I miss it. It is a great city that could be even greater were it not for the riff raff. Drasttic changes need to be made. To hell with being politically correct. Some stuff just needs to be cleaned up!
Now, what do you suppose would happen if those kids were not allowed to come to school? Dumb idea with all due respect.
Agree fundamental overhaul is needed. But it will be expensive, and surely rankle the PC world of the conservatives. Basically, you have to throw money at those Rham supposedly does not want to throw money at. Boarding schools, for example, that create the learning environment they should have at home.
I agree with much of this. We currently over-emphasize college. I think this is one of the early dominoes that falls to create too much college debt, rising tuition costs, and too many college graduates with worthless degrees. I am sorry but you do not have an automatic right to "pursue my dream" if that dream is an art history degree where you will work as an educated waiter with no ability to repay your loans. There is a shortage of skilled workers (such as machinists) in the US where the pay is damn good - over $50K and reaching much higher.
I don't think you need parental participation, but over the general population the data shows that educated parents have educated kids. The stories about kids rising out of their broken homes are terrific, but there aren't a lot of those stories. When they happen they make a movie about it. I think most children are heavily influenced by their parents and home life, for better or worse.
Yes. Screeching about how bad the parents of these low performers are may make some feel good and give the moral high ground (and is also justified) but that won't change anything. You need to either artificially create the good environment or force the parents to create it. I don't know if we will be willing to spend the money on the former and I know we don't have the political ******* to do the latter.
Agree fundamental overhaul is needed. But it will be expensive, and surely rankle the PC world of the conservatives. Basically, you have to throw money at those Rham supposedly does not want to throw money at.
People like Rahm and Obama are quite willing to "throw" $25,000 per child to UofC Lab school, and then tell us that for public school kids the amount of money doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRU67
Boarding schools, for example, that create the learning environment they should have at home.
I've been telling anyone who will listen for years, that the only solution is to get the kids out of the bad areas before the neighborhood gets its claws into them.
When I went to school in NYC, we had a system called tracking. Kids were put in 'tracks' according to their abilities and teachers could teach to that. Plus, disruptive students were expelled - not allowed to destroy education for everyone else. Disrespect of teachers and other students was not tolerated either. We had old buildings, old books, old desks (with inkwells!), but still we learned - I remember we read an abridged version of 'MacBeth' in sixth grade! And typically, the class size was 31 or 32 pupils. Why not bring back some of these things?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
