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 title of the thread (children performing poorly) and the body of the original post (who is responsible) are asking two different questions. First, who says children are performing poorly? Could we also asks why are children performing well?
The issue of teachers/administrators changing the students test answers on state standardized tests was well reported over the last month for this particular district in Atlanta. I didn't include any links to media articles for this reason, but it was well known that this school district was not one of the top-performing ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudmommy
In the US we have government schools, controlled by politicians (the boards of education). The alternatives is private education and home schools (and maybe other things). As long as the government is in control, it is difficult to show who is responsible. If all education were private, then it would be a lot easier. (It would also be cheaper as government schools cost around $8000 per kid per year, but that is for another thread.)
This doesn't really address the issue, does it (or am I missing something)? When children don't do well in school, I'm sure there are myriad reasons. But in using generalization or broad brush strokes, I think it comes down to parenting. I was trying to get feedback on whether people disagreed that parents are the most pivotal reason students don't do well and would attribute it more to society or the schools.
When we send our children off to the government institution(school)..it is in the belief that the teachers(professionals) will teach them basic abc's and 123,s....If they cannot do that...then I blame them....children are certainly in the schools long enough that they should be able to learn, and learn well.
The reason for children's poor performances and behavior in modern day schools lies within two groups of people. Parents and liberals. #1, they took prayer out of school. Children/teens have lost the fear of God. When children had the fear of God and going to Hell, they would never think twice about committing suicide or killing someone or beating up a teacher or shooting up a school. Because there is no God to fear in the school, there is no internal/spiritual restraint. And then #2, they took physical discipline out of school. That killed every sort of control the school ever had on kids. And now they have no external restraint. You can cuss out a teacher and only get a day in ISS. Fight another child, you get suspended for a week. Talk back to any teacher, they ignore it. The disciplinary system in our schools today are a joke. And it's primarily the fault of liberals thinking you can successfully control K-12 children and teenagers by talking sweetly to them or throwing them out. Kids need a good butt whooping from time to time to grow up as somewhat sane and functioning adults. If the parents aren't doing their job disciplining their kids, as a requisite for getting free education from public schools, the school should be allowed to physically discipline them as they please. Bring back the whips and paddles and start instilling the fear of adults and God into these kids.
Location: somewhere between Lk. Michigan & Lk. Huron
5,585 posts, read 980,833 times
Reputation: 1394
Are schools,parents,society, or all to blame for children's poor performance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathagos
Who really should be responsible for how a child does in school?
Of course the child, themselves, hold some responsibility… but does society play the biggest role? Where some kids (because of racial demographic or economic standing) are expected to do poorly, and are teased by peers when they do perform well? Or, do the schools need to do more to make sure the student has everything they need to be taught in a safe and nurturing environment? Or, do the parents bear the brunt of the responsibility – since they can set the tone at home for the importance of education on their children?
My personal belief is that, in order, parents, society, and schools share the responsibility – but overwhelmingly, the lion’s share of the responsibility is with the parents. What do the rest of you all think?
I can see that it is possible for all of the above; schools. parents, & society to be blame for a child's poor performance. #1 a child first needs the positive atmosphere & encouragement within the home to have the "feel good" about their selves, "outlook" #2 having that "feel good" positive attitude from home can allow the child to confront society in a more positive way rather than "I'm big" "I'm bad" attitude. #3 that same child brought up in a positive environment, atmosphere, along with encouragement can instill in their well being the best of them will come out.
Who really should be responsible for how the child does in school?
I say namely the child w/ encouragement & study help from their parents.
1. Some people are intelligent and inquisitive from the womb, I believe that. Even under negative life circumstances they will find a way to better themselves.
2. Given the right environment and encouragement most kids will see the benefits of learning and will do well.
3. Some people will never have the drive or aspiration or natural intelligence needed to do it on their own. In a supportive environment they can do well, but will probably only go so far. In a negative environment they will do nothing.
It starts our with the child and their own natural abilities, but that isn't a choice. Then the parents/home environment where most of life's learning takes places. Finally it's up to the schools where opportunities are given to those who are willing to take them.
Society? A village? Well only if you want to get the kids away from bad parents and home environments. That's a tricky thing though. And various programs and whatnot have been implemented to get around point number 3 with varying degrees of success. I wish we could accept that some people are not going to do all that well in school, ever. They aren't bad people and may even have skills that more educated people don't.
Start in kindergarten and take inner city or rural kids from bad schools and switch buildings, books and teachers with kids in the suburbs and the test results will not change.
It's obviously not society's fault. Society didn't force those parents to make those kids and society doesn't have a hand in forcing their kids to work hard. In fact, society does its' part by funding the schools.
The school can only share partial blame. Schools can't make education better without help from the parents, no matter what the buildings look like, how many computers they have, or how new the books are. Even if schools made education worse, good parents would move their kids to another school. However, not allowing school choice is an example of school systems' partial blame. I only blame the school itself for not permanently removing behavior problems that interrupt the learning environment and act as a cancer with the kids who don't have parental guidance but aren't problems.
Sure, some teachers suck in bad schools, but even suburban kids get sucky teachers and they work around it through parents who make them study at home. Math, science, reading and social studies are generally the same rules decade after decade, so blaming 5 year old books is ridiculous. Stats prove our test scores have remained flat for 30 years, so new books don't really do anything.
At the end of the day, it's all on the parents. They are the ones that force their schools to have standards. They are the one who show up and challenge their teachers, administrators and school boards. They are the ones that force their kids to study, pay attention and behave. Failure of the school is a collective failure of the parents in that school.
When we send our children off to the government institution(school)..it is in the belief that the teachers(professionals) will teach them basic abc's and 123,s....If they cannot do that...then I blame them....children are certainly in the schools long enough that they should be able to learn, and learn well.
There has to be backup at home. Even if it is nothing more than "do your homework before you go out and play" and parents checking that homework. Kids have to see, at home, that education is valued and connected to success in some way.
I think most people not involved in education today do not realize what teachers actually have to deal with--kids being sent to school not knowing their own names, kids who in kindergarten have already decided they want to be a "robber" when they grow up because that is the picture of success they see at home, kids who, when you address them as "Miss Jones", think that you are cursing them, or parents who throw assignments and books in the trash.
There has to be a foundation laid at home. The masses of this nation no longer value learning and unfortunately, until that changes, neither will academic performance.
Kindergarten students in some areas of our state routinely begin school with the vocabulary of a typical two-year-old. Research in neuroscience demonstrates that unused neural pathways are pruned away long before age five. How are schools expected to have impaired children operate on grade level when they begin at 40% of cognitive capacity with the ability for re-growth limited at best?
Whose responsibility is it to expose children to normal language development when the parents themselves are operating well below a high-school level? Even the best teacher can only do so much with 30 children a day, six hours a day, five days a week, for 180 days. And that is if the students have perfect attendance, which is not usually the case with low-income families.
It's always been okay in our society to have an underclass. We just don't like the results.
The approach to parenting in the above article is similar to the approach to parenting where I raised my daughter in Cupertino, CA - in the heart of Silicon Valley.
During Kindergarten & 1st grade, the local moms (frequently PhDs in EE) would arrive at the elementary school for recess - and take their kids into the library for drill & kill rather than let their kids play on the blacktop. After school: private math lessons & music lessons. And the moms frequently complained to the principal that there was not enough homework. Oh - the school is among the best in CA (which, I know, doesn't say that much).
When it was time for high school, I interviewed the principal and several faculty members to see if I wanted my daughter to attend the public school (we were considering private school). I asked them "what is your secret to student performance? Why are your student's scores & placement rates into elite universities so much higher than public high schools on the other side of town?"
Everyone's answer was the same: It is the families.
The principal went so far as to assert that he could exchange student bodies with the lower achieving public high school across the valley, but the achievement of individual students would not change.
The local public high school's enrollment is about 50% from 1st generation Americans, mostly from China, Taiwan, India and Germany. Most parents came to Silicon Valley to work in high tech - usually both mom & dad have PhDs in engineering or science (or both). English is not the primary language spoken at home (indeed, grandma & grandpa might live at home & speak no English whatsoever). These parent's expectations for their kids are high: locally, they call it the "HYPS" syndrome: it is almost an insult against their ancestors if the kids do not get in to Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Stanford.
Just to be clear: I'm talking about a typical middle-class (by Silicon Valley standards), rank-and-file engineers - not executives and certainly not wealthy (comfortable: living in 1500 sf 50 year old ranch houses that have not been updated or remodeled since the early 1980s - they drive 6 year old mini-vans with 175,000 miles on them, etc). Yet they expect, almost demand, academic excellence from their children. And the children perform. The children feel the pressure, understand the expectations, work hard (even pulling all-nighters). Some succumb to the pressure and commit suicide.
The principal said he contrasts his student body with the student body of a public high school across the valley. That high school's student body ALSO is largely 1st generation American - families from Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America. English is not the primary language spoken at home - indeed grandma & grandpa frequently live at home & speak no English whatsoever. The parents want their children to do well in school just as all parents do - but they don't put the same emphasis on academic performance.
The results are quite predictable.
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.