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.
There is some truth to this, but it is not true maybe 30% of the time. Teachers tell me about kids who grew up in great families on the wealthy part of town with parents who were devoted to education. In a family with four kids 2 of the kids in the family do great, one is average and one does poorly.
It's the individual kid's genes and personalities. In some cases even the best parents and teachers just can't motivate these kids matter how hard they try and they do poorly in school.
But in a family with poor parenting from the poor part of town, three do poorly and one does ok. No one ever said that good parenting was a guarantee but coming from a good family sure does stack the deck. You don't need 100% of your students doing well to have your school rated well. I work at a highly rated school and we still have our kids who fail (they make sure they graduate though so the numbers look good ). They are, however, the exception.
While my own kids aren't stellar grade wise, they are not disruptive. Dd#1 does what needs to be done and dd#2 is still learning what she has to do to succeed but they're both on a good path. As a teacher, I look at my own kids and I would take a class full of kids like mine. The issues they bring to the classroom are issues you can deal with. What do you do when half the kids in your classroom would rather be anywhere but there and 20% of them are absent every day?
There is some truth to this, but it is not true maybe 30% of the time. Teachers tell me about kids who grew up in great families on the wealthy part of town with parents who were devoted to education. In a family with four kids 2 of the kids in the family do great, one is average and one does poorly.
It's the individual kid's genes and personalities. In some cases even the best parents and teachers just can't motivate these kids matter how hard they try and they do poorly in school.
The statement is not about individual students, but a population (the school/s). You should know, you wrote it. It doesn't in anyway discount outliers. And where are you getting this 30% figure?
The statement is not about individual students, but a population (the school/s). You should know, you wrote it. It doesn't in anyway discount outliers. And where are you getting this 30% figure?
There are always outliers. My best friend comes from the most dysfunctional family I know. 4 out of 5 of the kids were real losers in high school and two still are today. (Two have figured it out over the last 20 years since they graduated) She won a full scholarship to an elite private school and then a full ride to college. She's the outlier in her family.
30% seems high to me. I can name dozens of families in my school where all of the kids are varying degrees of excellent. Yes, I see the outlier every now and again and wonder what happened knowing their siblings and parents but they're nowhere near 30%. I would say that the reverse is close to 30% that is kids from lousy families who end up doing ok to well but there is incentive to do well and crappy parents living in a crappy neighborhood can be an example of what not to do.
There are always outliers. My best friend comes from the most dysfunctional family I know. 4 out of 5 of the kids were real losers in high school and two still are today. (Two have figured it out over the last 20 years since they graduated) She won a full scholarship to an elite private school and then a full ride to college. She's the outlier in her family.
30% seems high to me. I can name dozens of families in my school where all of the kids are varying degrees of excellent. Yes, I see the outlier every now and again and wonder what happened knowing their siblings and parents but they're nowhere near 30%. I would say that the reverse is close to 30% that is kids from lousy families who end up doing ok to well but there is incentive to do well and crappy parents living in a crappy neighborhood can be an example of what not to do.
I agree. That is more likely than what he's asserting. Anyhow, my kid may or may not do well in school due to my influence (I can only hope), but in no way will she do poorly and plod along relative to the student body because of a school's or teacher's influence.
"If all or our teachers were excellent we would not be faced with failing schools!"
That was the comment from a friend of mine who was talking about the problem with schools and education today.
I tried to tell him that it was not really the teachers fault but the fault of unmotivated students, poverty, ignorance, teachers unions, a sick youth society, and government policies that says anyone who is interested in learning is a nerd, and a thousand other reasons. He would not buy it.
He went on to say: "If the teachers were any good they could get the students to listen to them and every student would excel. And if the teacher does not get results, fire them and bring in someone who can do the job."
Do you think my friend is right? Most of the fault is the teachers?
I disagree.
...............'You can lead a horse to water , but you can't make it drink "....
If all parents were excellent then teachers could actually do their jobs. Parents can teach their kids to read by reading to them every day EVERY DAY. Really? Is there not a bedtime in your house every day? Then do it then. (lazy)
If all parents were excellent then teachers could actually do their jobs.
If all parents were excellent what would we need with teachers? Have teachers decided what parents are not supposed to do?
My mother taught me to read. Unfortunately she didn't direct me at great books after that. If she could have done that why would I have needed with so many teachers. Plenty of them were pretty bad, worse than good books.
This is better than all of the economics instructors I have had:
So because one of my sons did terribly in school does that mean I was a poor parent and likely he grew up in poverty? I always assumed it was the teachers fault!
So because one of my sons did terribly in school does that mean I was a poor parent and likely he grew up in poverty? I always assumed it was the teachers fault!
Our kids see roughly 42 teachers in their school careers. Some for as much as 4 hours per day after deducting specials, lunch and recess in elementary school. Who do you think has more influence? Someone who has your child for 4 hours per day for 180 days per year for one year or you who is there 365 days since birth?
While I cannot make my children geniuses, I have way more influence on how they do in school than their teachers. As a full time working parent, if I only spent 4 hours a day with my kids on work days, I would spend almost twice as much time with my children than their primary elementary teachers did each year they were in school. So who is the big influence? The teacher who divides her attention among 25 students at a time or the parent who divides her attention between however many kids she has at a time and sees the child twice as much as the teacher?
Parents set the stage for whether or not kids value education. Trust me. A child who sees value in education is much easier to educate than one who isn't. Parents don't need to teach their kids but they do need to convey the message that learning is the student's job and that they will be held accountable for learning. If we live in areas where this belief is common, it is reinforced by peers and strengthened. I see this every day in my district.
I don't know what the cause was of your son doing terribly. You're in a much better position than I to say what the issue was. I just know it's not likely his teachers. It is far more likely to be personality, undiagnosed or diagnosed learning issues, demographics or family influences than it is the teachers. You can change teachers in my school and you see zero impact on how well kids do which is quite amazing when you look at some of the teachers. There is high pressure to perform. The only place I really see teachers making a difference is in the lower performing kids and then it has to be the right teacher and the right kid. The right teacher who clicks with a certain student can make a HUGE difference in that child's life but I do not see quality of teachers having much impact on the school as a whole. Yes, if all teachers were lousy, it would have a negative impact. Fortunately, teaching like any other profession runs a range of performance quality from lousy (usually weeded out early) to excellent. Like any profession, the percentage of excellent teachers is small. Contrary to popular belief that is ok. One thing you must consider is that it would be impossible to staff schools with only excellent teachers because there aren't enough of them. That's true of every profession out there.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 12-14-2013 at 01:12 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.
). They are, however, the exception. 
