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.
Everyone in this country is mystified by our education system--or lack there of. How dod we get to this point?
The politicians want us to belive it is the evil nasty greedy teachers being supported by an even nastier, greedier UNION.
Teachersw say it is all the government regulations and unreal expectations like NCLB 100% success rate by 2014.
PArents are thinking it has to be someone and why would the governement lie? The education system quality has declined for while in my opinion. My observation is that we have become such and affluent society that we became spoiled to the point that we think nothing will happen to us. The results, we becamse much more self centered as a society. We have this mentality that we are the top dog in the world and behaved as if other nations would not compete with us to the point of being a threat. Well, other nations also have become economic competition and we are starting to pay the price. We now do not want to give up our high standard of living. We want wages to stay high to maintain our standard of living without accepting that doing so cannot keep us competitive with other nations. We cuddle to much our children at such young age to the point we allow them to be so individualistic at their own peril. We as parents at times need to make some decisions on them even if they do not like them, education being one of them. I am aware there has to be a balance when we parent children but at times it is important to be a parent and make educational decisions for them. How many parents fight school districts because sports programs do not allow students to play sports if they have failing grades? What is a school for? Mainly to teach them and prepare them for life skills regarding academics that will help them in the business world.
As education is being deconstructed, all the tail wagging has distracted us from the real motive--PRIVITIZATION of education as we know it.
IMagine an educational system created by and run strictly for profit by folks who have no clue about learning and couldn't care less about our children becoming informed creative THINKERS--but becoming CLONES and STEPFORD students. How do you know that it is going to be run by a for profit organization that has not clue about learning? Organizations out there do have successful results. Why? Because they hire people that are experts on their fields. If I am an entreprenour and want to run an educational company, do you think I am going to hire a bunch of high school drop outs? What are the odds of success if I do so? I am going to hire people that are experts in education. Your assumption is flawed as far as I am concerned. Also, when businesses compete for your dollar, that will bring down excessive costs, tend to hire better and more efficient workers, and the customer generally benefits also.
That is excatly what the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is going to do if we allow it.
AM I CRAZY? Just ask yourself--"What do I want for my CHILD? What does my child need to know so he / she can make a difference in this world--and will that be what is taught? Good questions. Now, you are against privatizing. OK, under the present government run system, what is the success when we are compared in the world arena? Not good from what I can see. We are a leading nation at college level. Why? Because university level is not as conctrolled as high school and below where there is not competition.
WIll we start seeing a grading system similar to this ---
Imagine getting a report card from your teacher and finding out that you were graded not on how well you understood the course material or scored on the tests and assignments, but rather on to what extent you agreed with your teacher's strange public policy positions. That is the best way to understand the American Legislative Exchange Council's 17th Report Card on American Education released last week. Is that not the same that happens right now? What you claim is not valid as if will only happen in privatized education.
You can cite reports and I can do research and come up with some report that may counter this one and we can go back and forth. However, I think that the original intent of the Constitution was to allow people and their local levels and the states to decide what is good for them. The community can decide what type of education they want for their kids, not Capital Hill.
Teachers' Unions do not have secretive meetings? I venture to guess they do also. After all they are afraid to loose a monopoly on education they have. Take care.
That's correct, although I think the physical school setting does have value.
Is there evidence that we can successfully force students to learn?
I agree that the physical school setting has value. Peers are a force to be reconed with. We can't force them to learn but, my experience is, that if we provide them with peers who, at least, care about grades if not learning, most will attempt to learn (my dd's GPA went up by about one point just by moving her to a school where the kids care about grades). Sometimes, you can convince them that learning is in their best interest as well. Some kids look at their parents and have no intention of ending up like them. For them, education can be presented as a way out.
We can't force them but we can be there if they decide to take us up on an education. If they replace schools with cyber learning, you'll lose both the peer influence and having someone there to catch them if they are falling through the cracks. Not that we catch them all. We don't. There is only so much someone else can do to educate you. I can push a rope all day long but if you don't pull, it's not going anywhere.
I see the influence of peers on my students every day. I find that in order for my classes to learn best (the best I've seen them learn, anyway), I have to make the upper 20% uncomfortable. If they think their grade is in jeopardy, they start asking questions....they start trying to push the class the direction they need to go and, suprisingly, the bottom of the class listens to their questions. If I, OTOH, try to step them through the material before they have questions, the top of the class acts like they're bored to tears and the bottom of the class doodles, daydreams or tries to take a nap.
You can cite reports and I can do research and come up with some report that may counter this one and we can go back and forth. However, I think that the original intent of the Constitution was to allow people and their local levels and the states to decide what is good for them. The community can decide what type of education they want for their kids, not Capital Hill.
Teachers' Unions do not have secretive meetings? I venture to guess they do also. After all they are afraid to loose a monopoly on education they have. Take care.
Teachers aren't afraid of losing the monopoly on education they have. Teachers are afraid that no one is listening to the education experts...which would be teachers. Name another profession where we leave the experts out of the decision making.... Laypeople and politicians make the decisions as to how we'll educate and they set the goals of education. The problem is, they don't have a clue.
Educated and experienced teachers should be the ones at the forefront of any change to education. We're the experts on education. Unfortunately, no one listens to us. THAT is why we need a union and that union has done more to improve education than to harm it. Start looking at quality of education in union states and compare it to non union states. I've never been pro union in my life and before becomming a teacher, I didn't think we needed a teacher's union but that was back when I thought people actually treated teachers like experts. They don't. Everyone and their grandfather tries to tell us how to do our jobs and what we're doing wrong. You might be surprised what we can do if we're allowed to teach. That's what the union is trying to give us.
When I was an engineer, I didn't have a bunch of non engineers telling me how to best do my job. Non engineers didn't write the standards I worked to. Engineers did. The experts called the shots and it was assumed that we were competent to follow those directives. As a teacher I find that it's just the opposite. It's assumed I'm an idiot. Which begs the question of why anyone would put their kids in my class? I swear, I must have lost 30 IQ points or something between the time I received my masters in engineering and my masters in teaching.
I agree that the physical school setting has value. Peers are a force to be reconed with. We can't force them to learn but, my experience is, that if we provide them with peers who, at least, care about grades if not learning, most will attempt to learn (my dd's GPA went up by about one point just by moving her to a school where the kids care about grades). Sometimes, you can convince them that learning is in their best interest as well. Some kids look at their parents and have no intention of ending up like them. For them, education can be presented as a way out.
We can't force them but we can be there if they decide to take us up on an education. If they replace schools with cyber learning, you'll lose both the peer influence and having someone there to catch them if they are falling through the cracks. Not that we catch them all. We don't. There is only so much someone else can do to educate you. I can push a rope all day long but if you don't pull, it's not going anywhere.
I see the influence of peers on my students every day. I find that in order for my classes to learn best (the best I've seen them learn, anyway), I have to make the upper 20% uncomfortable. If they think their grade is in jeopardy, they start asking questions....they start trying to push the class the direction they need to go and, suprisingly, the bottom of the class listens to their questions. If I, OTOH, try to step them through the material before they have questions, the top of the class acts like they're bored to tears and the bottom of the class doodles, daydreams or tries to take a nap.
I think the scenario you initially described is inevitable and I don't have a problem with it. Doing away with schools altogether, however, would have a major negative impact on peer influences.
I don't think most motivational techniques require daily classroom contact.
I think the scenario you initially described is inevitable and I don't have a problem with it. Doing away with schools altogether, however, would have a major negative impact on peer influences.
I don't think most motivational techniques require daily classroom contact.
I too think it will happen. There is too much money to be made by those writing cyber school programs and too much money to be saved by not having brick and mortar schools, teachers or adminstrators. Unfortunately, I think it will widen the gap between the haves and have nots. Children will be only as motivated as those they are, regularly, exposed to are to get an education, so we will sentence them to the lives of their parents or worse if it turns out that peers and teachers actually motivated their parents.
Schools, at least, provide peers who can show a different way of life or different goals. I also question how well students can learn critical thinking skills without a human to guide them through the process and peers to bounce ideas off of. The best questions I ask my students don't fit a multiple choice format.
I think we'll do it because there is big money to be made by the companies who get the contracts and there is a lot to be saved that we're currently spending on schools. I think we'll just look the other way as the gulf between the haves and have nots gets bigger and bigger. The only positive I see coming out of this is we will, finally, have to accept what teachers have been saying all along. That the student must take responsibility for their own learning to succeed. While we'll, finally, put the blame for failure where it belongs, it will be too late for many of those who fail beause there will be no one there to try and turn them around. Not peers or teachers. Just a computer program. We're taking a step back in time. Back to when only the kids who had parents who cared got educated and that was ok with society. The excuse will be "We offered it to them". We'll, finally, correct another mistake. The notion that everyone should go to college. Colleges will be next.
What will happen is the elite will continue to educate their kids in brick and mortar buildings with teachers who are experts while the rest log on and get a minimal education at 1/4th the cost of a school education. Many will not get educated at all which will result in higher crime rates and the money that was saved in education being spent on welfare programs. We'll enjoy about 15 years of a cost save before it bites us on the butt but it will be too late then. .... and industry will be long gone because we will have nothing to offer industry.
This is the beginning of the end. All I can say is I'm glad I'm educated and educated enough to make sure my kids will be. My 14 yo has already asked if I'll homeschool her kids if education implodes. I told her I can give them an excellent physical science and math education but she's going to have to find someone else to do English, life and social science.
What motivational techniques do you think work without contact with peers or professionals? Seriously, cyber learning is not for everyone. There are those who can do it and they should but this will be done because there is money to be made and money to be saved not because it's in the best interest of most students.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 02-05-2012 at 12:28 PM..
Teachers aren't afraid of losing the monopoly on education they have. Teachers are afraid that no one is listening to the education experts...which would be teachers. Name another profession where we leave the experts out of the decision making.... Laypeople and politicians make the decisions as to how we'll educate and they set the goals of education. The problem is, they don't have a clue. As in anything, not all teachers are like I said and not all teachers are what you describe. I think I am correct with some teachers as I am. However, when I have read and seen what teachers in some cases talk about do not reflect care for children education. Often they do use it as an excuse to an ulterior motive. Also, government does exclude experts in many other fields very often, not just in education. That is why I believe they need to stay out of the education business. I am refering to the federal government. The Constitution does not enumerate education as part of their specific duties thus it belongs to the states. The states are the ones who decide what to do as far as I am concerned. If they want to run the education system themselves, go for it but if they want to privatize it, go for it also. The people in their own states can vote and say what they want, not Congress.
Educated and experienced teachers should be the ones at the forefront of any change to education. We're the experts on education. Unfortunately, no one listens to us. THAT is why we need a union and that union has done more to improve education than to harm it. Unions can be helpful but to a certain degree I admit. My point is that we can have a privatize system and if the community wants to allow a union in their system, fine. However, your claim that you are the expert on the children education system is valid to a degree. The parents in the community are the ones who should decide what they want for their kids. They can work with teachers in deciding what they want whether by privatization or not. As much as I may respect teachers I do not think they should be telling parents what kids need to learn and how. That is why privatization can help when parents shop for what they think is best for their children.
Start looking at quality of education in union states and compare it to non union states. I've never been pro union in my life and before becomming a teacher, I didn't think we needed a teacher's union but that was back when I thought people actually treated teachers like experts. They don't. Everyone and their grandfather tries to tell us how to do our jobs and what we're doing wrong. You might be surprised what we can do if we're allowed to teach. That's what the union is trying to give us. I am not against or for union, the communities decides that in my opinion. Why not look at communities, counties, or states that have some type of privatizationor voucher systems in the US and other parts of the world.
When I was an engineer, I didn't have a bunch of non engineers telling me how to best do my job. Non engineers didn't write the standards I worked to. Engineers did. The experts called the shots and it was assumed that we were competent to follow those directives. As a teacher I find that it's just the opposite. It's assumed I'm an idiot. Which begs the question of why anyone would put their kids in my class? I swear, I must have lost 30 IQ points or something between the time I received my masters in engineering and my masters in teaching.
I believe the problem you describe has more to do with government interference. Why does the government interfere so much in our lives, in this case education? In my opinion because the people often get tired of poor education, teaching systems, etc. and government controlled (and Union controlled at times) have failed. What to do? Call Big Brother to do something. To me it is the wrong move so Big Brother has to do something and that something often fails as in many othe areas when the government interferes. The government often listen to the voices that scream the most. Sadly, the great masses tend to be quiet and not say anything. The result? The governemnt is going to act on something the small minority with a big voice screams the loudest. The squeaky wheel gets the grease?
Actually, in some ways you hit it on the nail. Why should other engineers tell you what to do? Why should a union and the government tell the communities what they need? Take care.
Only the elite send their kids to private schools?
Give me a break.
Most small elementary private schools around me are 5k per student, thats not like a 40k boarding school bill. The problem is that too many people in this country have set themselves up for living off 2 incomes. Be it for social status, feminism, or what have you.
They do that because they want a very good life, to be able to send their kids to any school they want in an often very successful manner. I don't see that as a problem, I see that as people striving to get ahead, for which I give them much credit. It has nothing to do with social status, or feminism (my wife makes as much as I do, but who cares?). It sets up an environment where the potential for raising excellent students may be easier, as many constraints do not exist. But to temper that, a friend of mine came from Vietnam with $20 in her pocket, and nothing else. She is now one of the top plastic surgeons at MA General.
Don't know where you live, but most private elementary schools around here (and New England is loaded with them), are going to set you back over $15K a year.)
I posted earlier but IMhumbleO, it's worth repeating. Teachers deliver a prepackaged curriculum, which may/may not be suitable for the school district. It's analogous to being a waiter, the patron gives you the order, you place it, and the product is delivered. And if you go to any chain restaurant, which is more in keeping with what schools actually have devolved into, the "electives" which one can receive are limited from the set menu.
It's time we look at the entire educational system, that means, we examine how it's funded, who wants to make money off the current system, who plans to make money from a new system, and that means the tech companies, the construction contractors, the Wall Street investment houses which make big money floating bonds, the book publishers, and administration functionaries. Nothing else will do but it simply wont come to pass. The entrenched interests which frame the debate and issues don't want any of us to thing too deeply into how public education makes them rich....
I believe the problem you describe has more to do with government interference. Why does the government interfere so much in our lives, in this case education? In my opinion because the people often get tired of poor education, teaching systems, etc. and government controlled (and Union controlled at times) have failed. What to do? Call Big Brother to do something. To me it is the wrong move so Big Brother has to do something and that something often fails as in many othe areas when the government interferes. The government often listen to the voices that scream the most. Sadly, the great masses tend to be quiet and not say anything. The result? The governemnt is going to act on something the small minority with a big voice screams the loudest. The squeaky wheel gets the grease?
Actually, in some ways you hit it on the nail. Why should other engineers tell you what to do? Why should a union and the government tell the communities what they need? Take care.
No one said ALL teachers are this or that. I made a comparison to how other professions are handled. When I was an engineer, not all engineers were good engineers but the people making the decisions as to the standards we'd follow were ENGINEERS!! And other ENGINEERS studied and critiqued their recommendations!!! Novel concept, let those who are actually educated and experienced in the field determine what is best for the field. They didn't go out and ask people who use cars how we should build them and test them (customers were asked what features and styling they liked). They asked the people who design them and build them!! They asked the experts what to do. In education, we treat the experts like they're idiots and refuse to listen to them and then wonder why they seek union representation. Like it or not, teachers are the experts. Yet, everyone seems to think they should tell us how to do our jobs. It would be really nice if they'd let us teach.
I have no problem with the state standards I'm asked to teach to except I need about a 10 week longer year to have any hope of hitting them all to any extent. So I have to pick and choose. Now they're setting "Power standards" as the important ones (as in we're supposed to hit those first and then anything else we have time for). Here I have a problem. IMO, the standards I NEED to teach, if I can't teach them all, are the ones that *I* can take my students to new heights with. Well, most chemistry teachers aren't former engineers. My area of expertise, the areas in which I can really teach my students falls into the physical aspects of chemistry which turns out to be what they are cutting out to make room for the rest. The problem here is that it's not WHAT you know that's important as you're going to forget most of WHAT you are taught. It's the ability to think logically you learn while learning to think scientifically that matters. In order for me to teach well, I need to go where *I* can teach well.
52% of the state exams centers around the ability to think critically and interpret and use data. 12% is standards the kids should know. The state picks 6 of my 143 standards to put on the test each year. That being the case, which ones I teach isn't nearly as important as teaching my students to think and interpret and use data. IMO, that means I'm teaching standards that are not power standards and lobbing off what are considered power standards. The last school I taught at saw a 30% and 35% increase in passing scores the two years I was there when I taught my way. They also fired me....and their scores are right back wehre they were before they hired me... Seriously, I'm the expert on what I teach. I don't mind debating with other experts on what's important and what isn't but having people who have no idea what's important or not make these decisions is stupid. I spent 20 years in industry. Don'cha think I have some clue as to what is really important???
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 02-05-2012 at 01:28 PM..
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.
I swear, I must have lost 30 IQ points or something between the time I received my masters in engineering and my masters in teaching.
It would be really nice if they'd let us teach.