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.
You give them a social promotion so you can't be blamed for their failure.
You find a new job at the end of the school year in a better school district.
That's how teachers deal with this now.
It's their fault Johnnie is failing.
And a student has more rights than a teacher so the teacher has no alternative but to leave for greener pastures.
As I sub I can choose not to go back to any school should there be issues.
And I have done that.
I was at a HS where I asked the student to keep quiet because another student was reading out loud.
The student went postal on me saying I disrespected him in front of the class and how no one disrespects him in public. Thankfully he stormed out of the classroom rather than take a swing at me. I reported his actions to the office and then finished the class. After school was over that day I stopped in the office to sign out and was told that the student would have one day of ISS (in school suspension) for his actions.
Really ? Some "tough" discipline. I have never gone back to that school again to sub even though they keep calling me.
FWIW..the "disrespecting" talk is an indication of gang talk which I did convey to the office but they are in denial that there are any gang problems in the school despite the Latin Kings and Bloods symbols found in the various bathrooms.
And that of course makes you part of the problem. I would not substitute in any of the more colorful schools. I am older and don't need the hassle.
We need some means of staffing such schools with a professional core that specializes in that version of education. Likely at half the density of a normal school and with provisions for dealing with difficult kids. Blocking social promotions is fine...as long as a workable alternative is present.
But again I don't thik we are willing to spend the money. And it is a money issue.
And that of course makes you part of the problem. I would not substitute in any of the more colorful schools. I am older and don't need the hassle.
We need some means of staffing such schools with a professional core that specializes in that version of education. Likely at half the density of a normal school and with provisions for dealing with difficult kids. Blocking social promotions is fine...as long as a workable alternative is present.
But again I don't thik we are willing to spend the money. And it is a money issue.
Social promotions are not done by the teacher alone. They are usually told what the min grade is by administration.
And if you do fail them the parent can object and the school board can promote them over the summer based on their "potential to succeed".
The teachers in the classrooms are not the decision makers.
No promotion = loss of Fed dollars especially in Title 1 schools.
The almighty dollar wins out each and every time.
What downside? Why is increasing anyone's educational outcomes not worth it?
If you move the motivated kids out of an low end school you are going to lower the overall performance and the experience of the kids that stay. That is a strong downside.
If you move the motivated kids out of an low end school you are going to lower the overall performance and the experience of the kids that stay. That is a strong downside.
Is that not better than what we have now: dragging the middle and high students down? Read the info again...
Quote:
"While students in the bottom quartile have shown slow but steady improvement since the 1960s, average test scores have nonetheless gone down, primarily because of the performance of those in the top quartile. This "highest cohort of achievers," Rudman writes, has shown "the greatest declines across a variety of subjects as well as across age-level groups." Analysts have also found "a substantial drop among those children in the middle range of achievement," he continues, "but less loss and some modest gains at the lower levels."
If you move the motivated kids out of an low end school you are going to lower the overall performance and the experience of the kids that stay. That is a strong downside.
From where I see it the motivated kids are being held back, not the lower end kids being motivated.
No better way to get out of a test then to set a fire in the boy's bathroom eh ?
There are virtually no high end students involved and low number of middle students. And regardless it is still the downside. If one took the black college entrance up to 50 % or such it might be worth it. But basically going up by a factor of 2 from a tiny base? No real payoff. And Hispanic get effectively nothing for the tradeoff.
From where I see it the motivated kids are being held back, not the lower end kids being motivated.
No better way to get out of a test then to set a fire in the boy's bathroom eh ?
And now you have a higher percentage of the kids setting the boys bathroom fire. You think that good?
Regardless of the good done there is still the bad.
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.
