SBISD laying off 350 staff (Houston, Roma: mortgage, house, schools)

[westsideteacher]

Originally Posted by Texascrude

The surest way to create a permanent underclass is to force people to spend 12 years obtaining an education that they place no value on and legally prohibit them from exploring other options.

Perhaps - in the future - there could be a way for students to exhibit mastery of a certain skill set (whatever we deem necessary for minimum requirement graduates - based on what is legally required) and then they would be free to pursue other options.

[Aside: I'm hearing that standards-based grading is the way of the future, anyway. I've been doing it since January.]

[zhugeliang1]

There's no reason to be forcing pre-calc down the throats of people who are just waiting to graduate so they can move on with their lives.

A rep to Texascrude for this. Really the four by four math and science is such a waste of time and money.

[westsideteacher]

Originally Posted by TheEconomist

This hits the nail on the head. The status quo has already given us a "permanent underclass".

And no, kicking problem students out of school is not about race. It would apply to the skinheads and gangbangers alike (and there are caucasion gangbangers, too). What does create a permanent underclass is forcing low income students into classes with criminals and delinquents and not giving them a quality learning environment where they can simply read a book without worrying about getting shivved on the way to second period. That's what we do now though. It's truly a shame.

You're talking about a systematic change to the way we do K-12 education. How do we go about changing the status quo?

Let me be clear: I'm no lobbyist, I'm no politician - but "one-size-fits-all" education measures benefit no one. As a teacher, one of the first things you learn is that you need to understand and value all the life experiences your kids bring into the classroom. My virtue of choice or birth, each child has different priorities, and I'm not sure NCLB serves them all equally. NCLB has done a lot in terms of closing gaps, but what has it done for those whose life plans do not include college?

It is said that those kids - through standardized testing, etc - are made ready for (or at least qualified to attempt) college-level coursework. That's wonderful! Certainly, I believe all students can learn, and all students WILL LEARN! BUT... this NCLB stuff, this standardized stuff, how can we use it so it better serves those not inclined to go to college?

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by Texascrude

The surest way to create a permanent underclass is to force people to spend 12 years obtaining an education that they place no value on and legally prohibit them from exploring other options.

The thing that gets me is why all of sudden are these kids who have no business in the "general population" going to all of sudden show interest in learning because you send them to automotive or whatever vocation school? What's to keep some kids from those vocation schools from being disruptive and causing the same problems? Are you going to force them to learn and become employed in the the profession in which we are sending them to a separate school? Or do you think these kids will voluntarily agree to play along? Or maybe you can just get a guardian's signature and everything will be nice and legal? I understand what you are getting at but I don't think you fully grasp what you are suggesting, besides the creepy social implications.

[Texascrude]

Originally Posted by dv1033

The thing that gets me is why all of sudden are these kids who have no business in the "general population" going to all of sudden show interest in learning because you send them to automotive or whatever vocation school? What's to keep some kids from those vocation schools from being disruptive and causing the same problems? Are you going to force them to learn and become employed in the the profession in which we are sending them to a separate school? Or do you think these kids will voluntarily agree to play along? Or maybe you can just get a guardian's signature and everything will be nice and legal? I understand what you are getting at but I don't think you fully grasp what you are suggesting, besides the creepy social implications.

You're right that not everyone would immediately become learning magnets just because the subject changed, but you would think that letting the student actually got to choose what they wanted to learn, from potentially hundreds of options, that there would be enough of an interest to improve the individual learning. Everyone is capable of learning, it's just a matter of what. It certainly wouldn't be a panacea for all of the millions of high school dropouts, but giving choices and realistic options for a large group of kids would at least be a step in the right direction.

[Ashlynn_Joy]

Originally Posted by Texascrude

You're right that not everyone would immediately become learning magnets just because the subject changed, but you would think that letting the student actually got to choose what they wanted to learn, from potentially hundreds of options, that there would be enough of an interest to improve the individual learning. Everyone is capable of learning, it's just a matter of what. It certainly wouldn't be a panacea for all of the millions of high school dropouts, but giving choices and realistic options for a large group of kids would at least be a step in the right direction.

I have seen a lot and experienced enough to know that seeing every child reach and maximize their potential is the furthest thing from a lot of people's mind.
When I was in high school I remember witnessing five grown men jump on top of a girl, and I remember her head hitting hard against the floor in the hallway. I cant imagine what this girl did to deserve nearly getting killed...but I do know that day her father passed away and she was throwing a tantrum in the classroom. I remember in elementary getting kicked and punched by white boys who I suppose their parents were having a problem with facing the changing demographics (I am a girl and this was in the 1990s!). Still to this day I cannot stand a dirty shoe because I remember one instance which a boy stepped in something filthy and was kicking his shoe all over the back of my pants. I remember in elementary school a group of girls followed me to my class to blame me for writing obscenities on a bathroom wall (lol...I didn't even know what a curse word was). My only saving grace was that my father was in constant communication with this teacher because we just moved to Texas and he wanted to make sure I was been treated fairly. Not only that...I NEVER talked in any of my classes.

What passes off as linking talent to ability is really about crowd control in best case scenario. Often times it is just a way to keep them with their head down and their hands busy...no time to question why. As well, technology changes way too often. I don't feel comfortable with the idea of pushing children into a trade which may not be needed in another 15 years. It is fine if they believe that is their calling. It is a whole other issue to provide rewards and intentives to divert their attention to a path that you find most economically beneficial to you.

What children need is exposure to opportunity. Of course "Rolando" may be good at fixing cars if he has friends and family members that expose him at early age. How do you know he might not be better suited to become an engineer or a lawyer?

I understand that solving the problems in education will not be easy. The education system is desperately trying to bandaid a gushing wound that more has to deal with the underlying fundamental issues of our society than individual talent and ability. Now sure we can continue to pretend that is doesn't exist like we have all along...but we still need to have consideration for the other factors that are present.

[crone]

What is the purpose of public education these days?
There is an implication in the statement "not all kids should be college bound" that college is better than trade school.
As a society, we need to decide. Is college for a lifetime of learning or to obtain a work permit?"

[Texascrude]

Originally Posted by crone

What is the purpose of public education these days?
There is an implication in the statement "not all kids should be college bound" that college is better than trade school.
As a society, we need to decide. Is college for a lifetime of learning or to obtain a work permit?"

The purpose of public education is to provide free child care from the ages of 3 to 18.

[notready]

I heard that at one of the elementary schools they laid off by seniority. The teachers who were the most recent hires will be gone, regardless of how 'good' they are. I'm sure that more information will follow, but doesn't seem that this round will help eliminate the underperforming teachers.

[Oildog]

I talked with a couple teachers last weekend. They said they are safe this next year but if things continue they think they will be out the year after.