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.
1. It is ineffective- parochial and home schooled kids do better on exams
2. It is too expensive- parochial education costs half as much and produces a better product.
3. It is too administration heavy
4. It is too dominated by the teacher's union
5. The lunacy of political correctness and liberalism rules in the public schools
The public schools are liberal indoctrination camps that have failed in their stated purpose. Who supports public schools?
Liberals. They seem to want an ineffective education system.
I already did: mixed-ability classes, targeting the one-size-fits-all curriculum at the lowest achievers, halting everyone else's academic development and using them as defacto slave labor teacher's aides.
And all that began at least a decade before NCLB.
I didn't see a varied mix of brilliant to mediocre to terrible students in my class as a detriment. How exactly did such students affect your abilities to learn and advance?
Don't you people realize that education is a privilege not a right. Only the folks that can afford it should educate their children. Public education would only blur the class lines. The plebes might expect to live like us poles.
What do the rest need an education for anyway? So they can understand contracts describing credit cards or rent documents? Businesses can train their own workers. It can't take much to learn how to load a machine or pick vegetables anyway. All the poor have to know is how to fill the collection plate every Sunday.
I didn't see a varied mix of brilliant to mediocre to terrible students in my class as a detriment. How exactly did such students affect your abilities to learn and advance?
Good for you, but longitudinal test score declines (at both the national and international levels) tell a very different truth. They didn't because they weren't in my academic classes.
Did your learning depend on longitudinal test course? It didn't, in my case.
While what you're saying is true, public schools are making a HUGE mistake in pulling able students down to the struggling students' level.
Why take what used to be a relatively good thing and ruin it just because some parents are doing a poor job preparing their kids for school? Serious question.
Do you have data to back up your assertion here? Most public schools do try to tailor to individual students' needs. That's a big topic in education.
And what specific things would you change to make this better? Keep in mind that budgets usually don't allow a smaller class size than about 25 students per teacher.
Do you have data to back up your assertion here? Most public schools do try to tailor to individual students' needs. That's a big topic in education.
It's a "topic," but not much else. Look at the NCES data.
Quote:
And what specific things would you change to make this better? Keep in mind that budgets usually don't allow a smaller class size than about 25 students per teacher.
Assign classes according to ability/skill levels, and appropriately differentiate the curriculum and pace.
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.
