To Save the Schools, We Must Change the Social Contract

[Unkotare]

You just said ......

The Majority of students don't represent our nation as a whole.

Really? So what nation do all those millions of students in big city public schools represent?

The answer to why big city schools have problems is right in front of everyone's face....the parents. ....

It's not that simple either.

Nothing is that simple.....but wouldn't it be nice to address what I call the biggest problem first?

There is no "first" when all the parts of the problem are interconnected.

first is the one you start with,,,whether it be 5 mins or 5 yrs,,,one is always first,,,

You need to work on your reading skills.

 

[progressive hunter]

The answer to why big city schools have problems is right in front of everyone's face....the parents. ....

It's not that simple either.

Nothing is that simple.....but wouldn't it be nice to address what I call the biggest problem first?

There is no "first" when all the parts of the problem are interconnected.

first is the one you start with,,,whether it be 5 mins or 5 yrs,,,one is always first,,,

You need to work on your reading skills.

how so??

 

[Darkwind]

Teachers have tried desperately to adapt to the changing needs of our students--and we're failing...and leaving the profession.

To save the schools, we have to revisit, and perhaps even change, the social contract. Specifically, we need to be clear about individual rights and collective rights.

The Kindergarten teacher in the article below, who left her job, mentions the kids who turn over tables because they've never been told "no". The day this happens and your child is injured, YOU must take action. Go to the teacher, then principal, superintendent and school board--and take other parents with you. That way, you apply pressure on the slacker parents and school personnel to do their job or get out of the way, because the most fundamental principle of the collective has been breached: students must be safe in school.

We can take our schools back. We can decide certain behaviors can be understood, but not tolerated.

(If you do not want to click and read her entire article, which I recommend, read her first and fourth reason for leaving, which I have copied below.)

1. The old excuse "the kids have changed". No. No friggin way. Kids are kids. PARENTING has changed. SOCIETY has changed. The kids are just the innocent victims of that. Parents are working crazy hours, consumed by their devices, leaving kids in unstable parenting/coparenting situations, terrible media influences... and we are going to give the excuse that the KIDS have changed? What did we expect them to do? Kids behave in undesirable ways in the environment they feel safest. They test the water in the environment that they know their mistakes and behaviors will be treated with kindness and compassion. For those "well behaved" kids--they're throwing normal kid tantrums at home because it's safe. The kids flipping tables at school? They don't have a safe place at home. Our classrooms are the first place they've ever heard 'no', been given boundaries, shown love through respect. Cue "the kids have changed" .
.
4. Instead of holding parents accountable... and making them true partners, we've adopted a customer service mindset. I've seen the Facebook rants about attendance and getting "the letter". Well, here's the thing... I can't teach your child if he's not in school ‍. I was cussed out by parents who wanted to attend field trips but missed the THREE notes that went home--and when they did attend a trip, sat on their phone the entire time. I've had parents stand me up multiple times on Conference Days then call to tattle on me when I refused to offer an after school option. I've had parents tell me that I'm not allowed to tell their child 'no'...

Ex-Kindergarten teacher’s post about why she quit teaching goes viral for how real it is.

One possible avenue of exploration is a means by which undisciplined or troubled children are evaluated and weeded out from entering the main k - 12 system.

In many communities, we have head start programs, along with other programs that ostentatiously exist to help the children get a leg up on learning.

In each of these kinds of programs, the behavior of the child should be observed and evaluated and a determination made on allowing the child to enter the k - 12 system.

Clearly, in many cases (I don't know how many and the opinion I have is based on anecdotal evidence, but I'm sure we all have stories) we see children who are running wild over their parents or the parents simply don't care. Some of that is due to PC, I"m sure. The whole notion that corporal punishment is forbidden because it is somehow wrong. Punishment often is a 'good talking too', or perhaps a timeout in the corner that is supposed to last for 20 minutes, but in reality, lasts 3 because the parent can't be bothered to listen to the crying or is too engrossed in their phone conversations.

We see them acting up in stores, parking lots, and in later years, running in gangs or vandalizing other people's property.

All because they were never taught any respect or self-control

When a child is acting up in school, I place the blame on that fully on the parent. When the child graduates high school unable to read and do rudimentary mathematics, or cannot even understand the basic structure of our society and our government, I blame that on teachers.

So, we need a way to sort the wheat from the chaff so that the wheat can become viable members of society.

First, thank you for your response!

While you are largely on the right track, there are a couple of misconceptions here. Sadly there is no "weeding out" system in the K-12 public schools.

In the very most extreme cases---and I mean VERY extreme--students go to special schools that you might call "off site" if they have severe disabilities or their behavior is exceedingly extreme--basically juvenile detention extreme. Otherwise, they come to us. I think many years ago it was expected that children attain a certain level of "readiness": that they be able to skip, know some letters or some-such. But with the advent of disability laws, pretty much all that is out the window. If they live in district and meet the age cut off, they come to us. Period. (Even in diapers, a thread I started a couple of weeks ago. Yes. In diapers.)

Another misconception is that kids are even getting the "talking to" or the "time out". Sadly, many are not even getting THAT. As the Kinder teacher says in her post, some parents have forbidden her from telling their child "no". Some parents these days feel that publicly correcting their child is "humiliating" to the child. So believe me, if we had children who were being talked to or given time outs, we would be in much better shape. But we're not. In many cases there's no correction AT ALL.

This is what I mean about the Social Contract. We need to get back to the place as schools where we tell parents, "We WILL discipline your child if he/she needs it. The discipline will be intended to teach, not to harm. If you're not okay with that, please consider homeschooling."

I do not say this out of a place of unkindness, but in a place of desperation--so that our schools can operate as schools again. If not--I think we're done. It's all over but the inevitable "shouting".

I can't stay as I am about to run out the door, but I wanted to give a quick reply.

My first response was directed at your concept of 'changing the social contract'.

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- that would be changing the contract, would it not? Additionally to that, there should be imposed a set standard minimum behavior of a child before entering into the system.

I'm not exactly sure the extent of your concept of 'will discipline'. I am fine with punishment by the schools, but exclude physical punishments as a remedy. Frankly, I don't think anyone but a parent should have that right. However, other forms of punishment, i.e., a weekly suspension, required after school detention, things of this nature, would be very useful. I also agree that the parents either accept that, or they can't have their children in the system.

Oh I agree about corporal punishment in the schools. I don't want any part of that, no thanks.

As for a "weeding out", I'm wondering where you think these children would go if they were not permitted into the K-12 system. Do you just mean to start kindergarten? We already have pre-K programs, but they are not mandatory, they are parents' choice. One problem might be that you would have all needy children in those classes, all together. BUT, it's certainly an option. It's changing the contract as you say.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Where would they go? My thought is homeschooled.

No, what I mean is that the child will have to demonstrate to a professional the necessary behavior to attend any part of the k - 12 program.

I have always been of the opinion that if you have needy children, they should be in separate classes. For two reasons.

1. They have special needs that require a lot of time and resources which would detract from the other kids

2. Having needy kids in a class of children who do not have these special needs, in My opinion, hampers their ability to achieve their best.

 

[Darkwind]

And what is your experience in the schools?

I'm a parent & taxpayer

I.E.> 'customer'

That trumps anything

thx

~S~

Not when it interferes with the service I demand.

 

[Darkwind]

... other forms of punishment, i.e., a weekly suspension, required after school detention, things of this nature, would be very useful. .....

That's exactly what happens now.

To lesser degrees than in the past. Of course, they were more effective in My generation because My, and other parents, did not put up with that kind of behavior from Me.

 

[Darkwind]

...

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- ....

Kind of hard to reconcile that with compulsory education, don't you think?

A change to the social contract is the topic I believe.

 

[Unkotare]

...

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- ....

Kind of hard to reconcile that with compulsory education, don't you think?

A change to the social contract is the topic I believe.

So you want to do away with compulsory education?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Nice try, dumbass! I did as you asked!
How to Use Toe the line Correctly – Grammarist
Now, apologize for your insolence and ignorance and then STFU!

I like "Tow-The-Line" better. I will continue to use it. Thanks. (And you're welcome to have a heart attack each time I do). "Toe-the-line" originated in the 1800's.
Lots of phrases and words are changing in modern times. Maybe I'll submit "Tow-The-Line" to Miriam Webster as in my opinion it has a slightly different connotation.

But more importantly......
You mis quoted me from the starting line. Go back and look at exactly what I said verbatim.

I did not say "Tow-The-Line.....initially I said....."tow the hard Left line". A little different imo.
.
MY meaning was a hybrid,... she was not willing to follow the agenda or pull her weight as a Leftist or fall in line AND OR conform to their standards.
Sure, I could have used Toe The hard left Line.....but even if it was a mistake, are you that triggered and that much of a grammar Nazi?

As far as your demand for an admission of my "insolence and ignorance", and demand that I then STFU ?

lol. Sure,... after you ITG.

 

[Unkotare]

Nice try, dumbass! I did as you asked!
How to Use Toe the line Correctly – Grammarist
Now, apologize for your insolence and ignorance and then STFU!

I like "Tow-The-Line" better. I will continue to use it. ...

So you'll continue to be wrong? On purpose? Interesting choice.

 

[Darkwind]

...

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- ....

Kind of hard to reconcile that with compulsory education, don't you think?

A change to the social contract is the topic I believe.

So you want to do away with compulsory education?

I'd like to modify it so that children who do no meet a minimum behavioral standard would have to be homeschooled, and I'd make that mandatory on the parents or face civil and criminal liability.

That fact that we mandate that children go to school is an interesting concept given that we don't mandate that they achieve a minimum standard competency or force them to graduate.

 

[sparky]

And what is your experience in the schools?

I'm a parent & taxpayer

I.E.> 'customer'

That trumps anything

thx

~S~

Not when it interferes with the service I demand.

We (Joe public) do not demand, the system demands and Joe public obeys, does not question, and is summarillay dismissed if s/he does so

~S~

~S~

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

So you'll continue to be wrong? On purpose? Interesting choice.

My choice. Mind your own business

Obamacare was more wrong...but many were ok with it. Interesting choice.

 

[Unkotare]

...

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- ....

Kind of hard to reconcile that with compulsory education, don't you think?

A change to the social contract is the topic I believe.

So you want to do away with compulsory education?

I'd like to modify it so that children who do no meet a minimum behavioral standard would have to be homeschooled, and I'd make that mandatory on the parents or face civil and criminal liability.....

Have you considered the consequences of such a policy?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Why not just go ahead and learn a new language instead of pretending to make your own version of this one.

Why don't you man up and go down to the local Black Panthers meeting and push that demand when they use words you feel are not proper? Didn't think so.
You and the other one are welcomed to have a stroke if it bothers you that much.
Last time....My Choice. I'm not pushing it on anyone else. Now run along and find a life.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

To save the schools and change the "Social Contract" we must change the politics of this nation first. That's the root of all these problems. Legislators set the rules.
They are intertwined.

There is no way anyone is going to successfully change people like that on a national basis given the current political climate. it's futile and self defeating.

 

[Unkotare]

To save the schools and change the "Social Contract" we must change the politics of this nation first. That's the root of all these problems. Legislators set the rules.
....

You want to eliminate the legislature? How would that work?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

It's not a matter of what "you feel," it's a matter of correct or incorrect. And I correct people on such matters every day.

Knock yourself out.

Correct has been proven to be in the eye of the beholder.

Like I said....Obamacare was a much bigger wrong.....did you oppose that?
Millions of Leftards did not.

How about dropping the petty nonsense and adhering to the topic instead?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nice try, dumbass! I did as you asked!
How to Use Toe the line Correctly – Grammarist
Now, apologize for your insolence and ignorance and then STFU!

I like "Tow-The-Line" better. I will continue to use it. Thanks. (And you're welcome to have a heart attack each time I do). "Toe-the-line" originated in the 1800's.
Lots of phrases and words are changing in modern times. Maybe I'll submit "Tow-The-Line" to Miriam Webster as in my opinion it has a slightly different connotation.

But more importantly......
You mis quoted me from the starting line. Go back and look at exactly what I said verbatim.

I did not say "Tow-The-Line.....initially I said....."tow the hard Left line". A little different imo.
.
MY meaning was a hybrid,... she was not willing to follow the agenda or pull her weight as a Leftist or fall in line AND OR conform to their standards.
Sure, I could have used Toe The hard left Line.....but even if it was a mistake, are you that triggered and that much of a grammar Nazi?

As far as your demand for an admission of my "insolence and ignorance", and demand that I then STFU ?

lol. Sure,... after you ITG.

When you "toe the line" you follow the requirements.

Pulling a fucking rope has nothing to do with the topic, dumbass!

The reason that "tow the line" has become used is idiots like you who misuse it.

Want to hear another one? I hate when when people say it will "prolly" happen. Are we suddenly just too fucking lazy to pronounce and spell all the letters in a word?

 

[Darkwind]

...

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- ....

Kind of hard to reconcile that with compulsory education, don't you think?

A change to the social contract is the topic I believe.

So you want to do away with compulsory education?

I'd like to modify it so that children who do no meet a minimum behavioral standard would have to be homeschooled, and I'd make that mandatory on the parents or face civil and criminal liability.....

Have you considered the consequences of such a policy?

Yes.

 

[SweetSue92]

Teachers have tried desperately to adapt to the changing needs of our students--and we're failing...and leaving the profession.

To save the schools, we have to revisit, and perhaps even change, the social contract. Specifically, we need to be clear about individual rights and collective rights.

The Kindergarten teacher in the article below, who left her job, mentions the kids who turn over tables because they've never been told "no". The day this happens and your child is injured, YOU must take action. Go to the teacher, then principal, superintendent and school board--and take other parents with you. That way, you apply pressure on the slacker parents and school personnel to do their job or get out of the way, because the most fundamental principle of the collective has been breached: students must be safe in school.

We can take our schools back. We can decide certain behaviors can be understood, but not tolerated.

(If you do not want to click and read her entire article, which I recommend, read her first and fourth reason for leaving, which I have copied below.)

1. The old excuse "the kids have changed". No. No friggin way. Kids are kids. PARENTING has changed. SOCIETY has changed. The kids are just the innocent victims of that. Parents are working crazy hours, consumed by their devices, leaving kids in unstable parenting/coparenting situations, terrible media influences... and we are going to give the excuse that the KIDS have changed? What did we expect them to do? Kids behave in undesirable ways in the environment they feel safest. They test the water in the environment that they know their mistakes and behaviors will be treated with kindness and compassion. For those "well behaved" kids--they're throwing normal kid tantrums at home because it's safe. The kids flipping tables at school? They don't have a safe place at home. Our classrooms are the first place they've ever heard 'no', been given boundaries, shown love through respect. Cue "the kids have changed" .
.
4. Instead of holding parents accountable... and making them true partners, we've adopted a customer service mindset. I've seen the Facebook rants about attendance and getting "the letter". Well, here's the thing... I can't teach your child if he's not in school ‍. I was cussed out by parents who wanted to attend field trips but missed the THREE notes that went home--and when they did attend a trip, sat on their phone the entire time. I've had parents stand me up multiple times on Conference Days then call to tattle on me when I refused to offer an after school option. I've had parents tell me that I'm not allowed to tell their child 'no'...

Ex-Kindergarten teacher’s post about why she quit teaching goes viral for how real it is.

One possible avenue of exploration is a means by which undisciplined or troubled children are evaluated and weeded out from entering the main k - 12 system.

In many communities, we have head start programs, along with other programs that ostentatiously exist to help the children get a leg up on learning.

In each of these kinds of programs, the behavior of the child should be observed and evaluated and a determination made on allowing the child to enter the k - 12 system.

Clearly, in many cases (I don't know how many and the opinion I have is based on anecdotal evidence, but I'm sure we all have stories) we see children who are running wild over their parents or the parents simply don't care. Some of that is due to PC, I"m sure. The whole notion that corporal punishment is forbidden because it is somehow wrong. Punishment often is a 'good talking too', or perhaps a timeout in the corner that is supposed to last for 20 minutes, but in reality, lasts 3 because the parent can't be bothered to listen to the crying or is too engrossed in their phone conversations.

We see them acting up in stores, parking lots, and in later years, running in gangs or vandalizing other people's property.

All because they were never taught any respect or self-control

When a child is acting up in school, I place the blame on that fully on the parent. When the child graduates high school unable to read and do rudimentary mathematics, or cannot even understand the basic structure of our society and our government, I blame that on teachers.

So, we need a way to sort the wheat from the chaff so that the wheat can become viable members of society.

First, thank you for your response!

While you are largely on the right track, there are a couple of misconceptions here. Sadly there is no "weeding out" system in the K-12 public schools.

In the very most extreme cases---and I mean VERY extreme--students go to special schools that you might call "off site" if they have severe disabilities or their behavior is exceedingly extreme--basically juvenile detention extreme. Otherwise, they come to us. I think many years ago it was expected that children attain a certain level of "readiness": that they be able to skip, know some letters or some-such. But with the advent of disability laws, pretty much all that is out the window. If they live in district and meet the age cut off, they come to us. Period. (Even in diapers, a thread I started a couple of weeks ago. Yes. In diapers.)

Another misconception is that kids are even getting the "talking to" or the "time out". Sadly, many are not even getting THAT. As the Kinder teacher says in her post, some parents have forbidden her from telling their child "no". Some parents these days feel that publicly correcting their child is "humiliating" to the child. So believe me, if we had children who were being talked to or given time outs, we would be in much better shape. But we're not. In many cases there's no correction AT ALL.

This is what I mean about the Social Contract. We need to get back to the place as schools where we tell parents, "We WILL discipline your child if he/she needs it. The discipline will be intended to teach, not to harm. If you're not okay with that, please consider homeschooling."

I do not say this out of a place of unkindness, but in a place of desperation--so that our schools can operate as schools again. If not--I think we're done. It's all over but the inevitable "shouting".

I can't stay as I am about to run out the door, but I wanted to give a quick reply.

My first response was directed at your concept of 'changing the social contract'.

IF we started using these head start programs to weed out these children -- meaning that they would not be permitted into the K - 12 system -- that would be changing the contract, would it not? Additionally to that, there should be imposed a set standard minimum behavior of a child before entering into the system.

I'm not exactly sure the extent of your concept of 'will discipline'. I am fine with punishment by the schools, but exclude physical punishments as a remedy. Frankly, I don't think anyone but a parent should have that right. However, other forms of punishment, i.e., a weekly suspension, required after school detention, things of this nature, would be very useful. I also agree that the parents either accept that, or they can't have their children in the system.

Oh I agree about corporal punishment in the schools. I don't want any part of that, no thanks.

As for a "weeding out", I'm wondering where you think these children would go if they were not permitted into the K-12 system. Do you just mean to start kindergarten? We already have pre-K programs, but they are not mandatory, they are parents' choice. One problem might be that you would have all needy children in those classes, all together. BUT, it's certainly an option. It's changing the contract as you say.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Where would they go? My thought is homeschooled.

No, what I mean is that the child will have to demonstrate to a professional the necessary behavior to attend any part of the k - 12 program.

I have always been of the opinion that if you have needy children, they should be in separate classes. For two reasons.

1. They have special needs that require a lot of time and resources which would detract from the other kids

2. Having needy kids in a class of children who do not have these special needs, in My opinion, hampers their ability to achieve their best.

The balance with general ed students and special needs students is delicate and in my years as a teacher I've seen the pendulum swing. Right now IMO we need to pay more attention to the "good of the whole", especially when entire classrooms are regularly being evacuated for the behavior of one student. NOTE: this is not always a special needs student either.