I honestly see both sides of this.
I do think video recording of classrooms should be done, but it should only be viewable by the parents in closed meetings.
It annoys be that it isn't allowed by Teachers Unions.
When I see unauthorized videos, or hear recorded conversations of abuse by teachers on students that are ADHD or Neuroatypical, because the teachers are either poorly trained, or just lazy? And then, in conference, let off easy, till such recordings are released by the kids?
. . .it really, really steams me.
Bullying always begins with the teachers and staff, the kids just mimic and repeat what the adults intimate.
. . . and of course, we have all seen and heard about unorthodox teaching methods which conflict with values taught at home. . .
Bullying ALWAYS starts with the teachers, staff, etc.
. . . and of course, so does indoctrination.
The Teacher's Unions are like any other labor Union......they seek to codify bad behavior because it's the only way they can mange and maintain a sizeable membership. If they started to require actual performance they wouldn't have many members.
JO
When I was in seventh grade, I took a typing class. . . I can still type about 45 wpm.
So. . . when my kid has a chance to take a typing class in sixth grade, I was thrilled, made him take it.
About half-way through, he was still hunting for letters, and using one finger to hit them, the "hunt and peck" method.
I was thinking, wtf?! And he was getting an "A" in that class.
Well. . . when the parent teacher conference came. . I had a chat with her.
She let me know, it wasn't how the kids got the assignments done that mattered, only that they got them done.
?!?!
Worst teacher ever. I complained to the administration, but nothing was ever done. What a waste of my kids time.
Later in High School, he had that teacher again. Some administrative class, where she basically watched the kids read books & do homework (study hall) when they didn't have work to do on their future college planning. . . IOW? They couldn't fire her for incompetence, so they shuffled her around where she could do the least damage.
Let me ask you something. What is the end game here?
Should we take to the streets and demand the dismantling of education like Leftists did with police? Okay. Right NOW we can't get teachers. You think the B team is gonna be better?
Do you want acknowledgment that some teachers suck? Okay. Yes. Some teachers suck. Some coaches suck. Some cops suck.
I'm just never sure what to do with these anecdotes. You ever had a bad doctor? I have had scads, and great doctors too. Should I tell every great doctor I ever meet about all the horrid doctors I ever had? Same with every profession?
Again: what's the end goal?
Well. . . I don't really know for sure.
In may state. . Proposal A was a great first step.
When I was a kid, we had no choice about what school we had to go to. Now, if I thought my kid's school was really bad? And there were times. . .

His mom and I had a conversation with him in, it was either fifth or sixth grade about switching him to a school that was recognized as one of those National Exemplary Schools back in '02. It consistently ranks as one of the nation's finest, I graduated from it, and one of the State's leading politicians did too. . . so, there was that choice available. It was a long and heated debate. We ended up not b/c the one nearby offered free college credits and bus rides to the local college for a head start on his college education for free, it was the right choice.
But? the point is, we HAVE that choice now.
In your analogy with the doctor. . . you have choice, it is NOT compulsory to go to a doctor.
It IS compulsory to be educated by STATE standards. Whenever the STATE intervenes? Things go to shit.
When ever you infuse more choice, and make things voluntary, the market makes things better.
Now, there will be those that say, the poor will not send their kid to school if it is not the law, hence increasing crime, and all sorts of other societal ills. I'm not sure I agree with that. The poor love their kids just as much as the well off, and they will always look for the best options available to them.
If that State provides these services for free, and provides them in a paradigm that is similar to how we provide weapons of war? We might have a better system than we do now.
Our state Senator, (A Democrat, Stabenow, was the one that worked with a Republican Governor, Engler on the historic Compromise.)
The Devos family is very invested in private schools. . . but, they might have had some interest in the charter school movement, so I was hoping, if the DNC hadn't been so bull headed, and if Trump had gotten to all of his other priorities, we would have had some national school reform, with Stabenow's experience and willingness to compromise. . . but. . . sigh, another lost opportunity.
The day Michigan killed public schools (and then created the system we have today)
If you’re like me and you know just a little bit about the history of education in Michigan, you might already know that a lot of what we see in our…
stateofopportunity.michiganradio.org
". . .By that summer, Engler, his allies and his opponents still hadn’t come up with a solution that would save Michigan’s schools from the kinds of problems that brought down Kalkaska.
After a more balanced plan was turned down by the state’s voters in June, Engler proposed a dramatic step. He asked the Legislature to approve a 20% cut in the state’s property taxes without offering any way to recoup the lost revenue.
Then came the big day when everything changed.
It was July 19, 1993. Legislators were debating Engler’s proposed 20% property tax cut. Democrats opposed it. But one Democrat saw opportunity. Then state Sen. Debbie Stabenow, who had already declared her intention to run for governor, offered an amendment to Engler’s proposal. Rather than a 20% cut in property taxes, Stabenow proposed a 100% cut.
For an account of what happened next, we’ll switch from Goenner’s thesis to a paper published by two University of Michigan researchers in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management in 1997. In this paper, Paul N. Courant and Susanna Loeb wrote:
At the time, Stabenow’s move was widely interpreted as an attempt on her part to show how silly it was to cut taxes without specifying new revenues for the schools. If that was its purpose, it backfired. The Senate passed the amended bill the same day, the House followed a day later, and the governor immediately announced that he would sign the bill. With little debate the state had eliminated $6.5 billion in school taxes for the 1994-1995 school year. Absent further action, there would be no way to finance the public schools.
In other words, in the span of one day, Michigan leaders had decided to completely defund public schools.
The entire situation was a manufactured crisis, but without it, we wouldn’t have the education system we have today.. . . "