What Would You Do? (Education)

[Jackson]

A combination of factors, and the combination is different for different students in different places and circumstances.

Don't dance ... tell us. We want to know. What are the factors?

How much time you got? There is the native intelligence of the individual students involved, cultural attitudes towards education, nutrition, sleep, environment, Affective issues of every sort, quality of instruction, curriculum, facilities, etc.

And of course I should mention the student's security, state of mind, and support structure, among many other possible factors in many possible combinations.

Anything taking the blame off of us and put on the families. We have to change the the curriculum from social engineering to purely academics. Also, the families have to finally understand that they, too have the power of making sure their child is prepared for school and supporting the teachers in making sure they are doing homework and understanding that retention is indeed an option at the end of the year if they cannot master the basics of the program.

Just how are you going to make that happen?

By having the schools finally become the authority to school. right now, we enable parents to shirk their responsibilities make allowing students with sub par progress be passed on to the next grade. Once the parents FINALLY realize that working WITH the schools will enable their children to become successful students, they just may realize that they, too, are responsible for their children's success.

We have to stop this culture that schools are not important and make parents realize the children;s progress is also their responsibility. No parent want to see their children fail. It is incumbent of the school and teacher to keep the parents informed early that their child is in peril of not making enough progress. At that time it is up to the teacher to meet with them and design plans for home assistance and extra work in the subjects that they need. That's where workshops for parents are needed and they will focus on the need of their particular child.

No student will be passed onto the next grade without meeting the minimum standards.

In all my experience, I have had but two families reject the help and tried to force passing their child on to the next grade. I and the principal refused and showed them all copies of the communications that I and the school sent to them, plus warnings that retention was possible. The students were retained the following year.

 

[Jackson]

You would be surprised how much that would do.

Or not.

I'm not willing to allow our public education system to be destroyed so people can have tax payer money financing private and religious schools.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

You should remember that other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an adequate education.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Or not.

I'm not willing to allow our public education system to be destroyed so people can have tax payer money financing private and religious schools.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

You should remember that other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an adequate education.

Which of course increases the standards of living for the people without children. It is all a cycle.

 

[Spare_change]

I agree, BUT ....

Does that make it the responsibility of the government to ensure that the student gets a quality education, no matter the parent's involvement?? Does that mean that the government should usurp the rights of the parent to be involved? Should we just take the responsibility for educating our children away from parents and get it over with?

My initial response is, the parents are responsible. But if the government assumes such responsibility, shouldn't there be government sponsored, and funded, facilities to house and educate those children whose parents prove incapable of supporting education?

Mighty dangerous road you're suggesting there ....

That is my point --- at what point does the parent lose his right to determine the quality and quantity of education for his/her child? At what point does the government "know best"?

Seriously, though, don't you think that the government has already assumed such responsibility, that the schools have usurped the responsibility of the parents, not only to define the type and methodology by which the children will be taught, but also to what level, and even to the point of educating social mores, etc?

That sounds mightily like surrogate parenting to me.

Agreed. But who do we assign the consequences to? Personally, parents should be the ultimate arbiter concerning their children's' education. But how should educational standards be implemented, locally, or nationally?

FINALLY!! (I've been waiting 8 pages for somebody to ask my opinion - lol)

I believe the basic education model is flawed. That which might have worked in the 1930s and 1940s no longer works for us.

Today's education model is based on age - not education. If you are 8, you're in the third grade. If you are 9, you're in the 4th grade. WE suspend their educational growth in favor of social context.

Instead, we need to take a more scientific approach to providing quality education to our students.

We have the capability to explicitly measure the level of a student's knowledge on any subject. We know if he can read at the 3rd grade level - we know if he can do 6th grade math, and we know if he can write at the 10th grade level. Most schools do these measurements today, and then throw them in a file somewhere.

Instead, I propose that we use those measurements to determine not only the level of education the student has already received, but also to determine the level of education the student needs.

For example, let's talk about reading level. Arbitrarily, we plot reading grade level on a 1000 point continuum. If you can read at the first grade level, you get 125 points (remember, testing is going to determine his ability). If he reads at a 4th grade level, he gets 395 points.

So, we plot each student on this continuum (let's call it a graduation yardstick). Where is he placed decides, not only his accomplishments, but the next level he needs to attain. If he scores 395 points, he placed in a "5th grade level" reading class. If he scores 800 points, he is placed in a 10th grade reading class.

Easy to do -- we have all the tools available to us today. BUT - he is placed in that class, no matter his age. If he is 17, and reading at a third grade level, he sits in a class of other students learning at that level. If he is 9, and reading at a 10th grade level, he is placed in that class.

There is NOTHING more damaging to a student than being left behind. Asking a third grade reader to interpret Macbeth is a recipe for instant failure, destroying a student's hunger to learn, and losing a student.

If you've been in education for more than a month, though, you have seen what happens when a student catches fire - when he gets it, when he's excited about it, when he's motivated about it. That 17 year old, reading at a third grade level, will have his eyes opened - he will excel, and he will accelerate.

Why don't we do that? Simple - we have created a false social model that guarantees a certain failure rate. If you can't read in the 6th grade, you still won't be able to read in the 10th grade. If you have to go back to the 3rd grade, obviously, you're a failure and everyone knows it.

So --- eliminate grade levels. Acknowledge performance by scores. Students will be encouraged to perform, and teachers will be mandated to teach. School boards set a minimum set of scores to graduate, and parents have complete visibility into the process.

Piece of cake, huh?

So you want 17 year-olds and 8 year-olds sitting in the same reading class? Are you insane?

That's exactly right ---- if they both need the same level of teaching, then they should receive the same level of teaching. It makes no sense to throw away the opportunity to educate a 17 year old, no matter what his level might be.

 

[Spare_change]

They won't change until their existence is threatened.

I disagree. It's not as simple as that - specifically, the reasons for failing in those schools that are failing are diverse. It's why just throwing money at it doesn't solve the problem and likewise, taking money away doesn't solve anything either.

You would be surprised how much that would do.

Or not.

I'm not willing to allow our public education system to be destroyed so people can have tax payer money financing private and religious schools.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

They are not your child's share.

Oh, i forgot .. it all belongs to the government, right? You just ALLOW us to keep some of it, right? That money was given to the government to educate my student ... when they can't do that, they have abrogated the contract, and the money should be refunded.

 

[Spare_change]

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

Got it .... let's make sure everybody gets the same education, especially when it's no education at all. Equality is more important than quality, right?

The public school system is broken --- busted --- bad.

Where do you off saying that there is no education at all?

The point I was making (obviously, too subtle for you) is that our education system is built on a 1930s model, and has failed out students. Further, it caters to the lowest common denominator. Those who favor public education are more interested in providing the same level of education to ALL students, rather than providing education appropriate for EACH student. Equality is more important than quality, right?

Now you got it?

 

[ding]

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

Got it .... let's make sure everybody gets the same education, especially when it's no education at all. Equality is more important than quality, right?

The public school system is broken --- busted --- bad.

Where do you off saying that there is no education at all?

The point I was making (obviously, too subtle for you) is that our education system is built on a 1930s model, and has failed out students. Further, it caters to the lowest common denominator. Those who favor public education are more interested in providing the same level of education to ALL students, rather than providing education appropriate for EACH student. Equality is more important than quality, right?

Now you got it?

Good old, John Dewey. That POS.

 

[Spare_change]

So, why not give me my share and let me educate my child as I see fit - to include paying whatever extra is necessary to meet my standards?

Because, like roads, and the military, education is publically funded.

It's only publicly funded for those who utilize it. Why should you get paid for NOT educating a child?

Then become an active parent and agent of change for local schools. Don't expect me to pay for your cadillac schools or special religious schools.

You just don't get it, do you? None are so blind as those who cannot see.

I don't want to support your broken school system --- I want to use MY money to improve my child's education. You took it from me --- under the assumption that I was going to benefit from your misuse. I want it back!

Don't pay your taxes and see how well that works for you.

Also, why do you say it is broken?

No one has proposed not paying taxes. In fact, I have stated exactly the obvious - it's not about who pays, it's about how the money is spent.

I pay in taxes. If I do not have any children in school, but I realize a societal benefit from the education, paid for by my taxes.

I pay in taxes. If I DO have a child in school, I receive a return on my investment in two ways - 1) the same societal benefit I would receive even if I didn't have children, and 2) a quality education for my child.

When you can't provide a quality education to my child (and I don't think any American can justifiably argue the quality of our public education system), then, as a parent, I have a responsibility to 1) seek my investment back, and 2) find a better way to get my child a high quality education.

 

[Spare_change]

Competition works only if it is allowed to occur. Absent competition there is no impetus for change. An object at rest will remain at rest, an object in motion will remain in motion. The path of least resistance will be followed.

So you want all schools be required to accept all students and have them all meet the same standards?

Without that, there is still no competition if one school is allowed to skirt the requirements.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

His point was that if he chooses to send his kids to a private school because the public school is inferior he should be reimbursed for the taxes he paid. I agree.

Then you are both wrong. At least you have company.

Thank you for your opinion ...

 

[Spare_change]

The time has come.

It is time for us to take control of our government. Rather than wait to see how the government is going to fix our problems, we need to TELL them how to fix our problems.

Lesson 1. Education

What would you do to turn around our obviously malfunctioning education system?

All options are on the table --- what's your recommendations?


(Yes, I have some ideas ... but I'm going to read yours first. If they're good, I'm going to claim them as my own!!)

Abolish the DEA. Let state and local governments run their education system without interference from the federal government. Many will allow for a voucher system that will allow poorer families to enroll in higher performing schools. Public schools will be forced to perform or perish.

Why do you want to get rid of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)?

Typo- meant department of edu. Obviously

That would be the Education Department.

The shining example of government inefficiency and interference.

 

[Spare_change]

Or not.

I'm not willing to allow our public education system to be destroyed so people can have tax payer money financing private and religious schools.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

You should remember that other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an adequate education.

You kinda got that wrong ....

Other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an inadequate education.

Nobody proposes that we don't pay taxes - but that we be allowed to determine how, and where, the taxes for my child's education are spent. Pretty sure they call that "local control".

 

[Jackson]

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

You should remember that other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an adequate education.

You kinda got that wrong ....

Other childless couples paid taxes so your child could have an inadequate education.

Nobody proposes that we don't pay taxes - but that we be allowed to determine how, and where, the taxes for my child's education are spent. Pretty sure they call that "local control".

My child went to a terrific Lutheran school and was very well educated.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Don't dance ... tell us. We want to know. What are the factors?

How much time you got? There is the native intelligence of the individual students involved, cultural attitudes towards education, nutrition, sleep, environment, Affective issues of every sort, quality of instruction, curriculum, facilities, etc.

And of course I should mention the student's security, state of mind, and support structure, among many other possible factors in many possible combinations.

Anything taking the blame off of us and put on the families. We have to change the the curriculum from social engineering to purely academics. Also, the families have to finally understand that they, too have the power of making sure their child is prepared for school and supporting the teachers in making sure they are doing homework and understanding that retention is indeed an option at the end of the year if they cannot master the basics of the program.

Just how are you going to make that happen?

By having the schools finally become the authority to school. right now, we enable parents to shirk their responsibilities make allowing students with sub par progress be passed on to the next grade. Once the parents FINALLY realize that working WITH the schools will enable their children to become successful students, they just may realize that they, too, are responsible for their children's success.

We have to stop this culture that schools are not important and make parents realize the children;s progress is also their responsibility. No parent want to see their children fail. It is incumbent of the school and teacher to keep the parents informed early that their child is in peril of not making enough progress. At that time it is up to the teacher to meet with them and design plans for home assistance and extra work in the subjects that they need. That's where workshops for parents are needed and they will focus on the need of their particular child.

No student will be passed onto the next grade without meeting the minimum standards.

In all my experience, I have had but two families reject the help and tried to force passing their child on to the next grade. I and the principal refused and showed them all copies of the communications that I and the school sent to them, plus warnings that retention was possible. The students were retained the following year.

Oh, so it is that easy?

How do you do this when most of the parents of my former students are not Mom and Dad. I could count the number of students in my classes (a total of over 100 students) that had two married parents on one hand! Most lived with drug-addicted mothers, overwhelmed grandmothers, disinterested aunts, or were in the foster care system. Mom or Dad and sometimes both were incarcerated. Most were not born in the US, nor were they US citizens. Those are the students that kill our test scores.

What do you do if a parent speaks a language for which there are literally no translators?

It is so easy to come up with solutions if we assume all of our students come from two-parent, stable, and economically stable families, The problem is most of the time those kids don't need the help.

I sum it up this way: Poor students make for very poor students.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

My initial response is, the parents are responsible. But if the government assumes such responsibility, shouldn't there be government sponsored, and funded, facilities to house and educate those children whose parents prove incapable of supporting education?

Mighty dangerous road you're suggesting there ....

That is my point --- at what point does the parent lose his right to determine the quality and quantity of education for his/her child? At what point does the government "know best"?

Seriously, though, don't you think that the government has already assumed such responsibility, that the schools have usurped the responsibility of the parents, not only to define the type and methodology by which the children will be taught, but also to what level, and even to the point of educating social mores, etc?

That sounds mightily like surrogate parenting to me.

Agreed. But who do we assign the consequences to? Personally, parents should be the ultimate arbiter concerning their children's' education. But how should educational standards be implemented, locally, or nationally?

FINALLY!! (I've been waiting 8 pages for somebody to ask my opinion - lol)

I believe the basic education model is flawed. That which might have worked in the 1930s and 1940s no longer works for us.

Today's education model is based on age - not education. If you are 8, you're in the third grade. If you are 9, you're in the 4th grade. WE suspend their educational growth in favor of social context.

Instead, we need to take a more scientific approach to providing quality education to our students.

We have the capability to explicitly measure the level of a student's knowledge on any subject. We know if he can read at the 3rd grade level - we know if he can do 6th grade math, and we know if he can write at the 10th grade level. Most schools do these measurements today, and then throw them in a file somewhere.

Instead, I propose that we use those measurements to determine not only the level of education the student has already received, but also to determine the level of education the student needs.

For example, let's talk about reading level. Arbitrarily, we plot reading grade level on a 1000 point continuum. If you can read at the first grade level, you get 125 points (remember, testing is going to determine his ability). If he reads at a 4th grade level, he gets 395 points.

So, we plot each student on this continuum (let's call it a graduation yardstick). Where is he placed decides, not only his accomplishments, but the next level he needs to attain. If he scores 395 points, he placed in a "5th grade level" reading class. If he scores 800 points, he is placed in a 10th grade reading class.

Easy to do -- we have all the tools available to us today. BUT - he is placed in that class, no matter his age. If he is 17, and reading at a third grade level, he sits in a class of other students learning at that level. If he is 9, and reading at a 10th grade level, he is placed in that class.

There is NOTHING more damaging to a student than being left behind. Asking a third grade reader to interpret Macbeth is a recipe for instant failure, destroying a student's hunger to learn, and losing a student.

If you've been in education for more than a month, though, you have seen what happens when a student catches fire - when he gets it, when he's excited about it, when he's motivated about it. That 17 year old, reading at a third grade level, will have his eyes opened - he will excel, and he will accelerate.

Why don't we do that? Simple - we have created a false social model that guarantees a certain failure rate. If you can't read in the 6th grade, you still won't be able to read in the 10th grade. If you have to go back to the 3rd grade, obviously, you're a failure and everyone knows it.

So --- eliminate grade levels. Acknowledge performance by scores. Students will be encouraged to perform, and teachers will be mandated to teach. School boards set a minimum set of scores to graduate, and parents have complete visibility into the process.

Piece of cake, huh?

So you want 17 year-olds and 8 year-olds sitting in the same reading class? Are you insane?

That's exactly right ---- if they both need the same level of teaching, then they should receive the same level of teaching. It makes no sense to throw away the opportunity to educate a 17 year old, no matter what his level might be.

You are an idiot if you think that will work.

 

[Spare_change]

Don't dance ... tell us. We want to know. What are the factors?

How much time you got? There is the native intelligence of the individual students involved, cultural attitudes towards education, nutrition, sleep, environment, Affective issues of every sort, quality of instruction, curriculum, facilities, etc.

And of course I should mention the student's security, state of mind, and support structure, among many other possible factors in many possible combinations.

Anything taking the blame off of us and put on the families. We have to change the the curriculum from social engineering to purely academics. Also, the families have to finally understand that they, too have the power of making sure their child is prepared for school and supporting the teachers in making sure they are doing homework and understanding that retention is indeed an option at the end of the year if they cannot master the basics of the program.

Just how are you going to make that happen?

By having the schools finally become the authority to school. right now, we enable parents to shirk their responsibilities make allowing students with sub par progress be passed on to the next grade. Once the parents FINALLY realize that working WITH the schools will enable their children to become successful students, they just may realize that they, too, are responsible for their children's success.

We have to stop this culture that schools are not important and make parents realize the children;s progress is also their responsibility. No parent want to see their children fail. It is incumbent of the school and teacher to keep the parents informed early that their child is in peril of not making enough progress. At that time it is up to the teacher to meet with them and design plans for home assistance and extra work in the subjects that they need. That's where workshops for parents are needed and they will focus on the need of their particular child.

No student will be passed onto the next grade without meeting the minimum standards.

In all my experience, I have had but two families reject the help and tried to force passing their child on to the next grade. I and the principal refused and showed them all copies of the communications that I and the school sent to them, plus warnings that retention was possible. The students were retained the following year.

Nobody seriously questions the responsibility of parents to the educational process. But even you will admit that the schools make every effort to exclude parents from the decision making process. I have sat thru too many P-T conferences in which I was told to "not worry about it - we know what we are doing", or had my suggestions dismissed out of hand. I sat on too many school boards in which the administration would put together a predetermined answer to a problem not yet surfaced, fail to provide justification for that answer, and completely ignore alternative answers, leaving a half-educated school board to rubber stamp the only alternative put before them. Again, the professionals tried to say "we're the experts - just listen to us - we know what we're doing". Frankly, the arrogance in school administrations is appalling.

When is the last time you sat with parents and discussed class alternatives? When did you have to justify using one methodology over another? When is the last time your English teacher sent home a list of books he/she intended to read next year, and asked for parent input? When is the last time graduation criteria was determined with parent input? When is the last time you saw a school board member elected who DIDN'T have teachers' union support? When was the last time you sat in a school board in which a parent's time to address the board wasn't restricted to 2 or 5 minutes?

Educators complain about "teaching to the test". Why? Given that the test supposedly reflects what we want out students to know, it would seem inherently logical that the student should be taught what's on the test. Educators want to make teaching all about magic. They don't want to be held to specific and measurable quantifiers, because that would encourage qualitative judgement of their work. Simply, most educators don't want to be responsible to parents, and most educators consider parents a necessary evil.

Common Core is only the latest thing to fall prey to the "holier than thou" attitude of educators. It was not enough that simple, clear cut expectations was established, against which school and teacher performance could be measured. Educators immediately began to muddy the pictures, not only telling schools WHAT they needed to teach, but HOW they would teach it. School administrations saw CC as a way to control its teachers, not allowing them the flexibility necessary in the classroom. State administrators saw CC as a way to control school administrations, and federal agencies saw it as a way to dictate all the way down to the classroom. Enter the teacher's unions - who clearly don't want their clientele performance measured at all - and we create the political morass we have today.

Everybody wants to be in charge - and, the meantime, Johnny at the local McDonalds can't make change, and I get engineering graduates that can barely write their own name, much less put together a viable, understanding engineering proposal.

Of course, those parents accepted your help. They WANT to contribute, but the school system today and just patting them on the back, and telling them not to worry about it, because "... the experts got it all under control."

BS.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The time has come.

It is time for us to take control of our government. Rather than wait to see how the government is going to fix our problems, we need to TELL them how to fix our problems.

Lesson 1. Education

What would you do to turn around our obviously malfunctioning education system?

All options are on the table --- what's your recommendations?


(Yes, I have some ideas ... but I'm going to read yours first. If they're good, I'm going to claim them as my own!!)

Abolish the DEA. Let state and local governments run their education system without interference from the federal government. Many will allow for a voucher system that will allow poorer families to enroll in higher performing schools. Public schools will be forced to perform or perish.

Why do you want to get rid of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)?

Typo- meant department of edu. Obviously

That would be the Education Department.

The shining example of government inefficiency and interference.

I disagree. It's not as simple as that - specifically, the reasons for failing in those schools that are failing are diverse. It's why just throwing money at it doesn't solve the problem and likewise, taking money away doesn't solve anything either.

You would be surprised how much that would do.

Or not.

I'm not willing to allow our public education system to be destroyed so people can have tax payer money financing private and religious schools.

Why would taking my child's share of the 'education dollar' destroy the public education system?

They are not your child's share.

Oh, i forgot .. it all belongs to the government, right? You just ALLOW us to keep some of it, right? That money was given to the government to educate my student ... when they can't do that, they have abrogated the contract, and the money should be refunded.

You really need lessons on critical thinking. I have no children in school, but pay taxes to educate all children. It is not "my money" and more than it is yours.

 

[Spare_change]

How much time you got? There is the native intelligence of the individual students involved, cultural attitudes towards education, nutrition, sleep, environment, Affective issues of every sort, quality of instruction, curriculum, facilities, etc.

And of course I should mention the student's security, state of mind, and support structure, among many other possible factors in many possible combinations.

Anything taking the blame off of us and put on the families. We have to change the the curriculum from social engineering to purely academics. Also, the families have to finally understand that they, too have the power of making sure their child is prepared for school and supporting the teachers in making sure they are doing homework and understanding that retention is indeed an option at the end of the year if they cannot master the basics of the program.

Just how are you going to make that happen?

By having the schools finally become the authority to school. right now, we enable parents to shirk their responsibilities make allowing students with sub par progress be passed on to the next grade. Once the parents FINALLY realize that working WITH the schools will enable their children to become successful students, they just may realize that they, too, are responsible for their children's success.

We have to stop this culture that schools are not important and make parents realize the children;s progress is also their responsibility. No parent want to see their children fail. It is incumbent of the school and teacher to keep the parents informed early that their child is in peril of not making enough progress. At that time it is up to the teacher to meet with them and design plans for home assistance and extra work in the subjects that they need. That's where workshops for parents are needed and they will focus on the need of their particular child.

No student will be passed onto the next grade without meeting the minimum standards.

In all my experience, I have had but two families reject the help and tried to force passing their child on to the next grade. I and the principal refused and showed them all copies of the communications that I and the school sent to them, plus warnings that retention was possible. The students were retained the following year.

Oh, so it is that easy?

How do you do this when most of the parents of my former students are not Mom and Dad. I could count the number of students in my classes (a total of over 100 students) that had two married parents on one hand! Most lived with drug-addicted mothers, overwhelmed grandmothers, disinterested aunts, or were in the foster care system. Mom or Dad and sometimes both were incarcerated. Most were not born in the US, nor were they US citizens. Those are the students that kill our test scores.

What do you do if a parent speaks a language for which there are literally no translators?

It is so easy to come up with solutions if we assume all of our students come from two-parent, stable, and economically stable families, The problem is most of the time those kids don't need the help.

I sum it up this way: Poor students make for very poor students.

YOU personify the arrogance of the "educational elite". You ARE the problem - not those parents. But, hey, you found an excuse to justify your inability to educate --- so I guess it works for you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How will it be payed for? And, as a correlary - why should I pay for your child's private education?

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

Got it .... let's make sure everybody gets the same education, especially when it's no education at all. Equality is more important than quality, right?

The public school system is broken --- busted --- bad.

Where do you off saying that there is no education at all?

The point I was making (obviously, too subtle for you) is that our education system is built on a 1930s model, and has failed out students. Further, it caters to the lowest common denominator. Those who favor public education are more interested in providing the same level of education to ALL students, rather than providing education appropriate for EACH student. Equality is more important than quality, right?

Now you got it?

You have no evidence to support any of your comments! Our education system was not built on a 1930s model, so you can stop right there.

What is your educational background that qualifies you to pontificate on matters you obviously know little or nothing about other than what you have read from biased sources? I suggest educating yourself on this topic before embarrassing yourself further.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And of course I should mention the student's security, state of mind, and support structure, among many other possible factors in many possible combinations.

Anything taking the blame off of us and put on the families. We have to change the the curriculum from social engineering to purely academics. Also, the families have to finally understand that they, too have the power of making sure their child is prepared for school and supporting the teachers in making sure they are doing homework and understanding that retention is indeed an option at the end of the year if they cannot master the basics of the program.

Just how are you going to make that happen?

By having the schools finally become the authority to school. right now, we enable parents to shirk their responsibilities make allowing students with sub par progress be passed on to the next grade. Once the parents FINALLY realize that working WITH the schools will enable their children to become successful students, they just may realize that they, too, are responsible for their children's success.

We have to stop this culture that schools are not important and make parents realize the children;s progress is also their responsibility. No parent want to see their children fail. It is incumbent of the school and teacher to keep the parents informed early that their child is in peril of not making enough progress. At that time it is up to the teacher to meet with them and design plans for home assistance and extra work in the subjects that they need. That's where workshops for parents are needed and they will focus on the need of their particular child.

No student will be passed onto the next grade without meeting the minimum standards.

In all my experience, I have had but two families reject the help and tried to force passing their child on to the next grade. I and the principal refused and showed them all copies of the communications that I and the school sent to them, plus warnings that retention was possible. The students were retained the following year.

Oh, so it is that easy?

How do you do this when most of the parents of my former students are not Mom and Dad. I could count the number of students in my classes (a total of over 100 students) that had two married parents on one hand! Most lived with drug-addicted mothers, overwhelmed grandmothers, disinterested aunts, or were in the foster care system. Mom or Dad and sometimes both were incarcerated. Most were not born in the US, nor were they US citizens. Those are the students that kill our test scores.

What do you do if a parent speaks a language for which there are literally no translators?

It is so easy to come up with solutions if we assume all of our students come from two-parent, stable, and economically stable families, The problem is most of the time those kids don't need the help.

I sum it up this way: Poor students make for very poor students.

YOU personify the arrogance of the "educational elite". You ARE the problem - not those parents. But, hey, you found an excuse to justify your inability to educate --- so I guess it works for you.

Just put away the holier than thou attitude. It just proves you to be a classless, undereducated moron who like to spam message boards with your tripe.

You could not answer any of those questions, so you went for the insult. That is just like a typical educational expert wannabe!

We are all stocked up on stupid, We don't need any more.

 

[Spare_change]

You aren't paying for my child's private school - you are reimbursing me for NOT using your public school.

All other costs I will cover out of pocket.

No. I'm paying for YOUR child's school through MY taxes. It's not MY public school. I have NO kids. Our taxes pay for our social safety net as well. That doesn't mean we should be paying for mansions out of welfare money simply because folks aren't happy with section 8 apartments. Same applies to schools.

Got it .... let's make sure everybody gets the same education, especially when it's no education at all. Equality is more important than quality, right?

The public school system is broken --- busted --- bad.

Where do you off saying that there is no education at all?

The point I was making (obviously, too subtle for you) is that our education system is built on a 1930s model, and has failed out students. Further, it caters to the lowest common denominator. Those who favor public education are more interested in providing the same level of education to ALL students, rather than providing education appropriate for EACH student. Equality is more important than quality, right?

Now you got it?

You have no evidence to support any of your comments! Our education system was not built on a 1930s model, so you can stop right there.

What is your educational background that qualifies you to pontificate on matters you obviously know little or nothing about other than what you have read from biased sources? I suggest educating yourself on this topic before embarrassing yourself further.

First - my background.

Bachelor's in Journalism - University of Wisconsin
Master's in Political Science - University of Maryland
Adjunct Professor - University of Southern California

8 years on various committees (financial, curriculum, etc) - Chino Unified School District, Chino CA
6 years member School Board - Chino Unified School District, Chino CA
5 years on various committees - District 11, Colorado Springs, CO
4 years member, School Board, District 11, Colorado Springs, CO

Oldest son, high school Physics teacher, football coach
Second son, high school Math teacher, Head football coach at a different school
One daughter in law, Special Education Teacher, transitioning to School administrator

So, you can be assured that I know EXACTLY what I am talking about.

The "1930s model" was simply a reference to the outmoded school structure in use even today that is more predicated on the age of the student, rather than abilities of the student. We group our kids, not by educational level, but by some arbitrary common model based on their age. The result is that some kids get held back (because they can't expand their knowledge while waiting for the rest of the class to catch up) or we leave some behind (because they don't have the basics necessary to understand the level being taught.). Frankly, our school system celebrates mediocrity, while playing lip service to excellence. Even today, we pass kids along simply because of potential social stigma, rather than a concern for preparation for adult life.

Your very own statement about putting a 17 year old and a third grader together - despite the obvious commonality of need for that level of education support - speaks to that very failed model. Are you suggesting that a teacher can't handle a 17 year old and a 8 year old in the same room for one hour a day? If you don't have grades based on age, you don't have a grades stigma.

Now that you know who I am ---- just exactly what would you like to discuss? Come on - embarrass me.