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.
Yes there can definitely be a difference! Escort Rider hit it on the nose. I have taught in CO schools and now in VA schools. I am now one of the parents who would rather put my own children in private or home school due to VA system! Wow its bad here.
I used to work in a really bad neighborhood. There was a girl who I would sometimes pick up from school. One day she wasn't outside when I arrived. I didn't want to leave in case she might be running late so I went into the school to see if she was absent that day. It was total chaos inside! Students were screaming at each other in the halls and the teachers seemed oblivious, probably because they were used to it. I went into the office and a student (I'm guessing she was a student worker) was behind the desk leaning over it and loudly threatening someone in the hall to a fight. There were other adults working in the office and they ignored what was going on (again, I'm guessing because it was a common occurrence) I couldn't get any one's attention so after a few minutes I left. I can not imagine how a teacher would teach in that school nor can I imagine how students could learn. It was insane! So to answer your question, Yes! I think that some public schools are much better then others.
No, I wouldn't care, because I know that I can provide an enriched intellectual environment at home. If I couldn't do that, then I guess I probably wouldn't care, either---and for those uncaring parents, the school is the only chance their kids have, and that's why a better school makes a difference. If the parents don't care, the schools have to. Who else is there?
I want better schools not because I selfishly want superior education for my precious darlings, but because I see the value to the entire society in raising the general level of education. What I want for MY child is not the issue. I can take care of that myself. My concern is for those who can't.
Maybe I wasn't clear but I used the term exceptional and not enriched because what we provide at my school cannot be provided at home. Example, we have a 65 ft scientifically equipped research vessel the students use every week, or our wet lab in one of the top NOAA facilities in the country. Our students get research opportunities that parents cannot provide through "enrichment" at home.
I completely understand that parents want those things that they cannot provide for their children, like the ones we provide, and some of those exist in traditional schools as well.
I really feel like parents want to send their kid to this school or that school only based on test scores. You can get a good education anywhere if you are invested in it. I teach at a school which is great, but parents still hope and pray that their little angel gets "chosen" in the lottery to go to the charter school, which is also in our area and quite honestly draws out some of our best students.
Who honestly believes that one school is any better than any other?
I highly disagree with this statement. As a new teacher, and spending countless days in public schools in a variety of different areas and also working in a Catholic school as well, the type of discipline and education you get in a private vs. a public school is night and day or in even some public vs public schools. But I also know some people who have graduated from top public schools, meaning they got a letter A in their annual ratings, who are lucky they can spell their own name. This is not to say that ALL public schools are bad, there are some good ones, I've been in some, but the lack of education and caring on the part of the teachers I have witnessed in the majority of public schools in my state is appaling. Private schools have NO problem removing children from their school who are disruptive, not promoting them OR using punishment to get results. In one public school I was been in, again a top rated school, when a student refuses to do work, I have been told from more then one teacher "I have no time to sit and stand over a child. If they don't want to do the work, I can't do anything". I also went to private school my entire life and there was no such thing as not doing your work. We loved our teachers, but also had respect, so I can't imagine just sitting there saying "I don't want to do the work" And these are 2nd grade students I'm talking about. And the one child referenced by this teacher, got promoted too. Ahh..good ole social promotion When you have inner city schools with teachers who are no more then babysitters, I don't even have the time to wrtie about one "teacher" I observed and how she treated her students, the administration in the building and the amount of work these kids got in this school, your eyes would bleed. There are some schools where NO child will do good, because there is sub-par education standards and teachers who don't give two sh^%$..
I really feel like parents want to send their kid to this school or that school only based on test scores. You can get a good education anywhere if you are invested in it. I teach at a school which is great, but parents still hope and pray that their little angel gets "chosen" in the lottery to go to the charter school, which is also in our area and quite honestly draws out some of our best students.
Who honestly believes that one school is any better than any other?
I do.
It's not all about test scores. "Good schools" include classmates who aren't trashing the joint and throwing punches between classes. At the high school level, there's a wide range of availability of certain classes, even among schools within the same district. School culture is also dictated by administration, and a school with a gifted principal leading the way will draw better teachers. Different schools may also use different technologies, teaching styles, curricula...the list is endless. And that doesn't even take into consideration the fit between a specific school and a specific child.
So yes, absolutely some schools are better than others.
I have always thought that the the quality of education rests mostly on the individual. If a student really wants to learn, there are plenty of resources for him or her (e.g. the internet).
Well, sure. But that's like saying anyone who wants to can move a pile of bricks and then giving some people a wheelbarrow, others a basket, and for others, smearing each brick with itching powder.
If you want to bad enough, you can move the powdered bricks, but not nearly as easily or as well, and you have to really want it.
No, I wouldn't care, because I know that I can provide an enriched intellectual environment at home. If I couldn't do that, then I guess I probably wouldn't care, either---and for those uncaring parents, the school is the only chance their kids have, and that's why a better school makes a difference. If the parents don't care, the schools have to. Who else is there?
I want better schools not because I selfishly want superior education for my precious darlings, but because I see the value to the entire society in raising the general level of education. What I want for MY child is not the issue. I can take care of that myself. My concern is for those who can't.
Indeed, people who can provide an enriched intellectual environment at home not only provide their children with an enormous educational advantage but also go far to overcome the disadvantages of poor schools. However, I agree with a previous poster who responded that there are things you cannot realistically provide at home. I just want to give some different examples along more traditional lines, examples which do not depend on unusual levels of funding or esoteric situations.
Let's start with the experience of participating in a large music ensemble, be it a band, an orchestra, or a choir. Or how about participating in a drama production? While I know you from your postings to be a person of wide knowledge, I cannot quite believe that your learning is so vast that you could adequately substitute for the biology teacher, the chemistry teacher, the physics teacher, the calculus teacher, the AP history teacher, the AP literature teacher, the art teacher, the economics teacher, and even the shop teacher! When all these people are good teachers who work in a good environment, then even your children from an enriched home intellectual environment will have a different, and better education in such a school.
I really feel like parents want to send their kid to this school or that school only based on test scores. You can get a good education anywhere if you are invested in it. I teach at a school which is great, but parents still hope and pray that their little angel gets "chosen" in the lottery to go to the charter school, which is also in our area and quite honestly draws out some of our best students.
Who honestly believes that one school is any better than any other?
Absolutely. Because it's an issue of culture. Every school has one. If a school emphasizes academics and the parents back that up by being involved in their children's education by ensuring homework gets done, meeting with teachers to assess progress, and squelching budding behavior problems, then it creates a focused environment.
Case in point? I helped an inner-city charter school in my city. This school had children from the poorest of the poor families. Their requirements were simple: 1) The parents had to be fully engaged in the child's education and 2) Children had to conform to their code of conduct. Repeated violation meant expulsion without appeal.
The result? By the time these children reached 8th grade, their test scores were equivalent to better-funded suburban school systems. Of course, test scores are not the sole determinant of success, but they do speak volumes to the mastery of subject matter. During my many visits as a volunteer, the classrooms were orderly and the kids apparently were gaining the important social skills required to succeed later in life.
Likewise, public school systems are the same way. The more parents emphasize academic achievement, the more that school's environment will be geared towards academic achievement. If, on the other hand, all the parents care about is the football team or the dance squad, then that's what the students will care about. Not that those things are not a fun part of high school life (Far from it), but they are not the reason your child goes to school every day.
^^Certainly, a school with high parental involvement will have more high-scoring students than a school with low parental involvement.
However, I don't think the parents totally set the tone for the school. If the school administration is more interested in athletics, that's what the tone of a school will be, particularly in high school. ~1/4 of the parents turn over every year, and they turn over almost 100% in 4 years (allowing for some siblings).
The example of the charter school was interesting, but the kids whose parents don't/can't get involved need an education, too.
Great test scores mean that the teachers are teaching the test...and do not dare stray to more creative or artistic areas. The children are praised for "performing" well on a test....not on their social or physical abilities. A monkey can learn to regurgitate trained behaviors, but I desire for my children to develop a love for learning and not be just another number on a state test for the superintendents and legislators to check off. Where is the humanness in that? My children are not numbers....I pray more parents look deeper into a school's program and philosophy than test scores, which just reflects that the children simply have finely tuned robotic memories. Not looking to having a conversation with those kids.....boring
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Students were screaming at each other in the halls and the teachers seemed oblivious, probably because they were used to it. I went into the office and a student (I'm guessing she was a student worker) was behind the desk leaning over it and loudly threatening someone in the hall to a fight. There were other adults working in the office and they ignored what was going on (again, I'm guessing because it was a common occurrence) I couldn't get any one's attention so after a few minutes I left. I can not imagine how a teacher would teach in that school nor can I imagine how students could learn. It was insane! So to answer your question, Yes! I think that some public schools are much better then others.
And these are 2nd grade students I'm talking about. And the one child referenced by this teacher, got promoted too. Ahh..good ole social promotion
When you have inner city schools with teachers who are no more then babysitters, I don't even have the time to wrtie about one "teacher" I observed and how she treated her students, the administration in the building and the amount of work these kids got in this school, your eyes would bleed. There are some schools where NO child will do good, because there is sub-par education standards and teachers who don't give two sh^%$..
