Let's get rid of teachers.

[Samson]

True, school today is filled with activities, group projects, student reports, demonstrations, class discussions and computer exercises. The old days of students spending their day doing drill and practice, homework, and hours of listening to a teacher lecture are a thing of the past in most schools. My grand kids, in elementary, middle school, and high school have homework almost every night that sometimes takes hours. Two of the kids had projects they had to work on over the holidays. Schools in general are far better than they were 25 or 50 years ago.

I think so many people that are complaining about schools have no idea what goes on in the classroom today.

Most complainers cite dropout rates as the primary measurement of public school (teacher) failure:

However,
Fast Facts

The status dropout rate represents the percentage of 16- through 24-year-olds who are not enrolled in school and have not earned a high school credential (either a diploma or an equivalency credential such as a General Educational Development [GED] certificate).

The status dropout rate declined from 12 percent in 1990 to 7 percent in 2011.

Better Parenting?

Perhaps

Dropout rates were virtually unchanged between 1990 - 2000: the main decline happened between 2001 and 2011.

Ok Class; Your homework is to find what major Education Reform legislation was passed in 2001.

Hint:

Introduced in the House by John Boehner (R-OH) on March 22, 2001
Passed the House on May 23, 2001 (384–45)
Passed the Senate on June 14, 2001 (91–8)

It looks like the trend toward lower dropouts started years before the Education Reform legislation became effective in 2002. Most of the provisions of the legislation weren't really implemented till 2005.


http://www.nsba.org/SchoolLaw/Issue...ehindTimetableandFrequentlyAskedQuestions.pdf

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16]Fast Facts

Are you looking at the same graph I am?

Try again. Focus on "ALL RACES."

BTW as per norm, Government stats must descriminate, breaking out hispanics, blacks, and whites.

 

[Samson]

"The old fashioned classroom lecture" doesn't even exist anymore. Teachers nowadays do not stand up in front of the class lecturing, but, rather, address different styles of learning and different levels of questions, as well as active hands on learning, interaction, group learning, etc. Sitting behind a computer and learning a 'trade' is not going to prepare anyone for the real world of a career, is not going to foster life long learning, and will not develop critical thinking skills.

True, school today is filled with activities, group projects, student reports, demonstrations, class discussions and computer exercises. The old days of students spending their day doing drill and practice, homework, and hours of listening to a teacher lecture are a thing of the past in most schools. My grand kids, in elementary, middle school, and high school have homework almost every night that sometimes takes hours. Two of the kids had projects they had to work on over the holidays. Schools in general are far better than they were 25 or 50 years ago.

I think so many people that are complaining about schools have no idea what goes on in the classroom today.

So Flopper, if schools are better than they were 25 or 30 years ago why the complaints about American students doing poorly against students in foreign countries?

Because those that compare the education system in the USA with other countries are idiots.

 

[Flopper]

The old fashioned classroom lecture" doesn't even exist anymore. Teachers nowadays do not stand up in front of the class lecturing, but, rather, address different styles of learning and different levels of questions, as well as active hands on learning, interaction, group learning, etc. Sitting behind a computer and learning a 'trade' is not going to prepare anyone for the real world of a career, is not going to foster life long learning, and will not develop critical thinking skills.

True, school today is filled with activities, group projects, student reports, demonstrations, class discussions and computer exercises. The old days of students spending their day doing drill and practice, homework, and hours of listening to a teacher lecture are a thing of the past in most schools. My grand kids, in elementary, middle school, and high school have homework almost every night that sometimes takes hours. Two of the kids had projects they had to work on over the holidays. Schools in general are far better than they were 25 or 50 years ago.

I think so many people that are complaining about schools have no idea what goes on in the classroom today.

So Flopper, if schools are better than they were 25 or 30 years ago why the complaints about American students doing poorly against students in foreign countries?

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

 

[jasonnfree]

True, school today is filled with activities, group projects, student reports, demonstrations, class discussions and computer exercises. The old days of students spending their day doing drill and practice, homework, and hours of listening to a teacher lecture are a thing of the past in most schools. My grand kids, in elementary, middle school, and high school have homework almost every night that sometimes takes hours. Two of the kids had projects they had to work on over the holidays. Schools in general are far better than they were 25 or 50 years ago.

I think so many people that are complaining about schools have no idea what goes on in the classroom today.

So Flopper, if schools are better than they were 25 or 30 years ago why the complaints about American students doing poorly against students in foreign countries?

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

 

[Flopper]

Most complainers cite dropout rates as the primary measurement of public school (teacher) failure:

However,
Fast Facts



Better Parenting?

Perhaps

Dropout rates were virtually unchanged between 1990 - 2000: the main decline happened between 2001 and 2011.

Ok Class; Your homework is to find what major Education Reform legislation was passed in 2001.

Hint:

Introduced in the House by John Boehner (R-OH) on March 22, 2001
Passed the House on May 23, 2001 (384–45)
Passed the Senate on June 14, 2001 (91–8)

It looks like the trend toward lower dropouts started years before the Education Reform legislation became effective in 2002. Most of the provisions of the legislation weren't really implemented till 2005.


http://www.nsba.org/SchoolLaw/Issue...ehindTimetableandFrequentlyAskedQuestions.pdf

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16]Fast Facts

Are you looking at the same graph I am?

Try again. Focus on "ALL RACES."

BTW as per norm, Government stats must descriminate, breaking out hispanics, blacks, and whites.

It's a little hard to read the graph but do I agree it's a bit better after 2002. However, keep in mind there are federal and state dropout prevention programs at work plus a major recession eliminated a lot of jobs for teens. I don't think there is any way to determine what programs or events are responsible for lower dropout rates. There are too many variables.

 

[Flopper]

So Flopper, if schools are better than they were 25 or 30 years ago why the complaints about American students doing poorly against students in foreign countries?

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

That's not the only reason the US scores lower and it may not be the major reason.

One thing that has come out of comparing the educational systems of the top performing nations is the difference in policy implementation. The top performing countries are better at implementing educational policy than the lower performing nations.

For example in top performing countries, Singapore, Shanghai, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan, proven successful educational policies can be implemented in all schools because there is strong central control and funding. Compare this to the US in which there are three levels of policy creation excluding the schools, federal, state, and school district. So an educational program which has proven to be very effective, has to be sold to 50 states and possibly 14,000 school districts. Good programs are rejected because of lack of funds, political reasons, or conflicting policies. The top scoring countries just don't have the problem. Once a program has been proven to be effective, it can often be implemented in all schools within a year or so. In the US, it can take many years and many good programs never get implemented throughout the country. You can also have programs at each level that have conflicting requirements.

 

[humorusa]

agree with you

 

[Esmeralda]

So Flopper, if schools are better than they were 25 or 30 years ago why the complaints about American students doing poorly against students in foreign countries?

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

Also, the US is a very large and very diverse society. Comparing the US education system to countries like Japan, Korea, or Sweden, with small, homogenous populations, is ridiculous. Our needs and situation are totally different.

 

[Esmeralda]

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

That's not the only reason the US scores lower and it may not be the major reason.

One thing that has come out of comparing the educational systems of the top performing nations is the difference in policy implementation. The top performing countries are better at implementing educational policy than the lower performing nations.

For example in top performing countries, Singapore, Shanghai, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan, proven successful educational policies can be implemented in all schools because there is strong central control and funding. Compare this to the US in which there are three levels of policy creation excluding the schools, federal, state, and school district. So an educational program which has proven to be very effective, has to be sold to 50 states and possibly 14,000 school districts. Good programs are rejected because of lack of funds, political reasons, or conflicting policies. The top scoring countries just don't have the problem. Once a program has been proven to be effective, it can often be implemented in all schools within a year or so. In the US, it can take many years and many good programs never get implemented throughout the country. You can also have programs at each level that have conflicting requirements.

All of these countries also teach to the exam. America didn't used to do that, but now, in an effort and because of pressure, they have been trying to do that in order to achieve the type of scores these little countries achieve. This is a huge mistake on the part of the US. Critical thinking skills, creativity, innovation, etc. do not come out of education that is geared toward teaching students how to do well on exams. "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." Albert Einstein ...

 

[Samson]

It looks like the trend toward lower dropouts started years before the Education Reform legislation became effective in 2002. Most of the provisions of the legislation weren't really implemented till 2005.


http://www.nsba.org/SchoolLaw/Issue...ehindTimetableandFrequentlyAskedQuestions.pdf

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16]Fast Facts

Are you looking at the same graph I am?

Try again. Focus on "ALL RACES."

BTW as per norm, Government stats must descriminate, breaking out hispanics, blacks, and whites.

It's a little hard to read the graph but do I agree it's a bit better after 2002. However, keep in mind there are federal and state dropout prevention programs at work plus a major recession eliminated a lot of jobs for teens. I don't think there is any way to determine what programs or events are responsible for lower dropout rates. There are too many variables.

Agreed, but NCLB certainly has NOT had the eefect of increasing dropout rates, often associated with poor teaching.

Thus all the bitching about standardized testing comes more from the whiny establishment that is being held accountable, and not from the student body, which appears to have benefited if not completely, at least in part, by the legislation.

 

[Flopper]

Are you looking at the same graph I am?

Try again. Focus on "ALL RACES."

BTW as per norm, Government stats must descriminate, breaking out hispanics, blacks, and whites.

It's a little hard to read the graph but do I agree it's a bit better after 2002. However, keep in mind there are federal and state dropout prevention programs at work plus a major recession eliminated a lot of jobs for teens. I don't think there is any way to determine what programs or events are responsible for lower dropout rates. There are too many variables.

Agreed, but NCLB certainly has NOT had the eefect of increasing dropout rates, often associated with poor teaching.

Thus all the bitching about standardized testing comes more from the whiny establishment that is being held accountable, and not from the student body, which appears to have benefited if not completely, at least in part, by the legislation.

There is little evidence that poor teaching is responsible for the dropouts. There's a ton of evidence that dropout rates correlative closely with poverty. Over half the dropouts come from "dropout factories" where no more than 60% of the students graduate. The very best teachers are not going to turn most of the kids around.

A lot of the responsibility for drop outs does fall on the education system. Dropping out of school is a process, and does not occur overnight. The process often starts prior to a child entering into the school system. Poor academic achievement as early as elementary school is predictor of dropping out of school. The system is certainly at fault for not recognizing the at risk kids and taking action. However, teaching is always geared to the average student in the class, not the high risk kids. These kids need special attention and often fall through the cracks.

 

[Flopper]

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

That's not the only reason the US scores lower and it may not be the major reason.

One thing that has come out of comparing the educational systems of the top performing nations is the difference in policy implementation. The top performing countries are better at implementing educational policy than the lower performing nations.

For example in top performing countries, Singapore, Shanghai, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan, proven successful educational policies can be implemented in all schools because there is strong central control and funding. Compare this to the US in which there are three levels of policy creation excluding the schools, federal, state, and school district. So an educational program which has proven to be very effective, has to be sold to 50 states and possibly 14,000 school districts. Good programs are rejected because of lack of funds, political reasons, or conflicting policies. The top scoring countries just don't have the problem. Once a program has been proven to be effective, it can often be implemented in all schools within a year or so. In the US, it can take many years and many good programs never get implemented throughout the country. You can also have programs at each level that have conflicting requirements.

All of these countries also teach to the exam. America didn't used to do that, but now, in an effort and because of pressure, they have been trying to do that in order to achieve the type of scores these little countries achieve. This is a huge mistake on the part of the US. Critical thinking skills, creativity, innovation, etc. do not come out of education that is geared toward teaching students how to do well on exams. "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." Albert Einstein ...

The NCLB testing is a management tool used to determine poor performing schools so additional resources (money) can be directed to to those schools. Many people think the law rewards good performance and punishes poor performance. Nothing could be further from the truth.

For about 90% of the schools NCLB testing just uses valuable class time prepping kids for the test. However, the major problem is it pushes teachers to spend inordinate amounts of time on the areas that are hit hardest on the tests, neglecting other parts of the curriculum which are more important.

For schools that don't show adequate improvement in test scores, additional resources are directed to the schools which can take many forms such as tutoring, additional personnel, training, equipment, or supervision. Of course, emphasis is placed on teaching the kids to score higher on the tests, ignoring whatever is not covered on the test.

The problem with teaching to the test is important learning skills such as critical thinking, creative thinking, communicating, and collaborating don't test well and are almost ignored. Even elementary skills such as writing and creating coherent text are ignored in lieu of testing spelling or grammar.

 

[Asclepias]

Comparing US test scores with other nations is usually an apples and oranges comparison because the education goals are very different. In the US, we strive to provide 12 years of school to every child with an option of college. This is not the case in many of the countries that out score the US. Unlike other countries, admission to secondary schools is automatic in the US. In most of the countries that score well, there are requirements for secondary schools. Many countries require that students make application and admission is based on test scores and grades. College prep programs are made available to students that have the higher grades and test scores. Students that don't meet the standard are funneled into occupational training.

There is no way the US can match the test scores in most of these countries unless we change our educational philosophy. We would have to abandon the idea that every student is entitled to 12 years of school and college prep courses. Students would have to earn this right or pursue job related courses.

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

Also, the US is a very large and very diverse society. Comparing the US education system to countries like Japan, Korea, or Sweden, with small, homogenous populations, is ridiculous. Our needs and situation are totally different.

Thats actually a very good point I have never considered. I believe if you do not have a curriculum that takes into account the ethnic makeup of your students then you are doing them a huge disservice by teaching from a Eurocentric point of view. I know how flat out bored I was with school. The only reason I stayed in school was for sports. The only way my mother would let me play sports was if I had a B average.

 

[Flopper]

Thanks. I haven't heard that explanation yet but it makes sense.

Also, the US is a very large and very diverse society. Comparing the US education system to countries like Japan, Korea, or Sweden, with small, homogenous populations, is ridiculous. Our needs and situation are totally different.

Thats actually a very good point I have never considered. I believe if you do not have a curriculum that takes into account the ethnic makeup of your students then you are doing them a huge disservice by teaching from a Eurocentric point of view. I know how flat out bored I was with school. The only reason I stayed in school was for sports. The only way my mother would let me play sports was if I had a B average.

What hurts the US so badly in comparing test scores is the bottom 10%. The dropout factories do horribly on these standard tests and drag the average down. The countries that typically do very well have much more homogeneous populations, strong central control of the educational system, and centralized funding.

I think the goals of US education is so different than most of these countries, there is no way the US can compare well. Put admission requirements on High Schools in the US as many of these countries do and you would see a marked increase in test scores.

 

[Asclepias]

Also, the US is a very large and very diverse society. Comparing the US education system to countries like Japan, Korea, or Sweden, with small, homogenous populations, is ridiculous. Our needs and situation are totally different.

Thats actually a very good point I have never considered. I believe if you do not have a curriculum that takes into account the ethnic makeup of your students then you are doing them a huge disservice by teaching from a Eurocentric point of view. I know how flat out bored I was with school. The only reason I stayed in school was for sports. The only way my mother would let me play sports was if I had a B average.

What hurts the US so badly in comparing test scores is the bottom 10%. The dropout factories do horribly on these standard tests and drag the average down. The countries that typically do very well have much more homogeneous populations, strong central control of the educational system, and centralized funding.

I think the goals of US education is so different than most of these countries, there is no way the US can compare well. Put admission requirements on High Schools in the US as many of these countries do and you would see a marked increase in test scores.

I know a group of Black people that have committed to home schooling their children using African centered methods. The results are absolutely astounding.

African-American Home School

I take the halfway approach in that I let my kids attend public school but they get instruction on the weekends and after school using the same African centered approach. The results is that my oldest is getting her masters paid for by the university she attends and my younger 2 are at the top of their classes and on the same path.

 

[Flopper]

Thats actually a very good point I have never considered. I believe if you do not have a curriculum that takes into account the ethnic makeup of your students then you are doing them a huge disservice by teaching from a Eurocentric point of view. I know how flat out bored I was with school. The only reason I stayed in school was for sports. The only way my mother would let me play sports was if I had a B average.

What hurts the US so badly in comparing test scores is the bottom 10%. The dropout factories do horribly on these standard tests and drag the average down. The countries that typically do very well have much more homogeneous populations, strong central control of the educational system, and centralized funding.

I think the goals of US education is so different than most of these countries, there is no way the US can compare well. Put admission requirements on High Schools in the US as many of these countries do and you would see a marked increase in test scores.

I know a group of Black people that have committed to home schooling their children using African centered methods. The results are absolutely astounding.

African-American Home School

I take the halfway approach in that I let my kids attend public school but they get instruction on the weekends and after school using the same African centered approach. The results is that my oldest is getting her masters paid for by the university she attends and my younger 2 are at the top of their classes and on the same path.

Unfortunately in 60% of the families both parents work which makes it really difficult unless you team up with another parent. However, if you have kids is in one the bottom 10% schools, you probably need to find some way to get them out by either homeschooling, transfer to another school, or private school.

In the really bad schools there are a few dedicated good teachers but most of the teachers are new and less experience or they aren't there because they choose to be there. In the district I taught, there were about a half dozen schools that were so bad the only people that taught there were teachers that were assigned to teach there, usually because no else wanted them or they were new hires.

One thing I have noticed about the really bad schools is they usually have some of the best principals. Maybe you have to be to survive.

 

[Asclepias]

What hurts the US so badly in comparing test scores is the bottom 10%. The dropout factories do horribly on these standard tests and drag the average down. The countries that typically do very well have much more homogeneous populations, strong central control of the educational system, and centralized funding.

I think the goals of US education is so different than most of these countries, there is no way the US can compare well. Put admission requirements on High Schools in the US as many of these countries do and you would see a marked increase in test scores.

I know a group of Black people that have committed to home schooling their children using African centered methods. The results are absolutely astounding.

African-American Home School

I take the halfway approach in that I let my kids attend public school but they get instruction on the weekends and after school using the same African centered approach. The results is that my oldest is getting her masters paid for by the university she attends and my younger 2 are at the top of their classes and on the same path.

Unfortunately in 60% of the families both parents work which makes it really difficult unless you team up with another parent. However, if you have kids is in one the bottom 10% schools, you probably need to find some way to get them out by either homeschooling, transfer to another school, or private school.

In the really bad schools there are a few dedicated good teachers but most of the teachers are new and less experience or they aren't there because they choose to be there. In the district I taught, there were about a half dozen schools that were so bad the only people that taught there were teachers that were assigned to teach there, usually because no else wanted them or they were new hires.

One thing I have noticed about the really bad schools is they usually have some of the best principals. Maybe you have to be to survive.

They do have support groups for home schooling and there are some African centered schools on the east coast but they stay in embattled with the school districts trying to take control and change the curriculum.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

All of these countries also teach to the exam. America didn't used to do that, but now, in an effort and because of pressure, they have been trying to do that in order to achieve the type of scores these little countries achieve. This is a huge mistake on the part of the US. Critical thinking skills, creativity, innovation, etc. do not come out of education that is geared toward teaching students how to do well on exams. "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." Albert Einstein ...

Nothing wrong with teaching to the test. You blacks don't like it because you do so miserably on all standardized tests.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[. The only reason I stayed in school was for sports. .

I believe that, you ignorant jackass. That's why you think africans had cell phones 4000 years ago. HAHAHA

 

[Samson]

It's a little hard to read the graph but do I agree it's a bit better after 2002. However, keep in mind there are federal and state dropout prevention programs at work plus a major recession eliminated a lot of jobs for teens. I don't think there is any way to determine what programs or events are responsible for lower dropout rates. There are too many variables.

Agreed, but NCLB certainly has NOT had the eefect of increasing dropout rates, often associated with poor teaching.

Thus all the bitching about standardized testing comes more from the whiny establishment that is being held accountable, and not from the student body, which appears to have benefited if not completely, at least in part, by the legislation.

There is little evidence that poor teaching is responsible for the dropouts. There's a ton of evidence that dropout rates correlative closely with poverty. ....

Interesting that you believe teachers cannot change dropout rates.

This position only serves to support the notion that they are little more than glorified baby-sitters.

If dropout rates have declined, and they "coorelate closely with poverty" then poverty rates must be declining also from 1990 to 2010.

You have evidence this is the case?