I have 4 teachers in my family and they express their displeasures of parents more than anything else. Parents don't take responsibility and are irresponsible towards their childs advancement in education.

I'm still confused why some people have kids!!! Just pull out

(01-06-2015 12:36 PM)NewJersey GATA Wrote:  I have 4 teachers in my family and they express their displeasures of parents more than anything else. Parents don't take responsibility and are irresponsible towards their childs advancement in education.

I'm still confused why some people have kids!!! Just pull out

If that is all they are doing then you have your answer as to why they continue to have kids.

(01-05-2015 08:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Privatization will only give good education to the folks with the most money.

Vouchers for private schools. In ohio real estate taxes fund public schools. As a homeowner you could direct that tax you pay to fund the tuition, or part of it, to the private schools your kids attend.

(01-06-2015 12:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(01-05-2015 08:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Privatization will only give good education to the folks with the most money.

Vouchers for private schools. In ohio real estate taxes fund public schools. As a homeowner you could direct that tax you pay to fund the tuition, or part of it, to the private schools your kids attend.

$16,000 in property taxes should get me a lot!

(01-06-2015 12:18 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Tell me if I'm wrong, but I think a huge number of people who lean towards the GOP wouldn't mind spending on education if the money being spent actually improved things. I get the feeling that people feel it's just a gigantic money pit. I understand that sentiment. Then when you factor the individual being morphed into the one size fits all model. It's herding cats.

I think for the most part we could have better discussions if we could be honest with each other, but the inherent interests of third parties won't allow the dialogue.

Mach, in most large cities - in a ton of those schools, with the educations system as it is currently constituted - it is nothing but a money pit. We, as a country, are trying to force an education on kids that don't want one with parents that don't care if they get one.

That will be a big loser every time and no amount of money will fix it. In those places, you could spend $50K per child and they will still finish their 12th year of school virtually illiterate.

Frankly, we would be better off if we were to take that money and spend it on infrastructure projects and force these folks to dig ditches and roads with shovels by hand, but pay them for the work. No ditch digging - no money from the state period.

There once was a market for ditch diggers - unfortunately, we still have plenty of people that aren't equipped for anything more than ditch digging, but we've mechanized the digging - there is no market for their capabilities.

Rather than just giving them money to sit on the porch, at least if we pay them to dig ditches, we as a country get some benefit and they get paid for their work. It's a win/win.

(01-06-2015 11:59 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  If you look back and attempt to figure out where we went off the rails on education, there are a couple of major changes that have occurred. One is that in the 50s and 60s, kids that didn't want to be there quit and went to work - ie., the non-performers and more troublesome kids self weeded themselves out of the mix. Two, the abolishment of corporal punishment suddenly made the punishment for misbehaving way easier because the alternative is now suspension, in many cases, just what the kid wants, because he doesn't want to be there anyway and it is now illegal for them to "self weed themselves out" of school.


^^^^^^ This x's ten. A couple of other huge changes. 1. the IEP kids and least restrictive environment. 2. Standardized testing. 3. REQUIRING ALL KIDS TAKE A SET NUMBER OF CREDITS! You used to teach to challenge the top end. The top 10-15%. The kids who fell below that earned C's and D's. If a kid failed he failed. Both sides knew the score. Kids self weeded themselves. Now the malcontents are FORCED to take the higher ended classes and as a teacher your performance is dictated on how these kids do. You have totally changed the dynamic. If schools want the scores in the paper. Your MOST important kids are the bottom 20-30%. This is where you get your bang for the buck. We expend an inordinate amount of energy keeping the malcontent pampered. These truly are the most important people in your school. If they do well. Your report card does well. People think you are doing a great job and you get pats on the back. In reality your top 20-30% are paying a significant price.

I agree.

(01-06-2015 12:18 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Tell me if I'm wrong, but I think a huge number of people who lean towards the GOP wouldn't mind spending on education if the money being spent actually improved things. I get the feeling that people feel it's just a gigantic money pit. I understand that sentiment. Then when you factor the individual being morphed into the one size fits all model. It's herding cats.

I think for the most part we could have better discussions if we could be honest with each other, but the inherent interests of third parties won't allow the dialogue.

Again, I agree.

The bigger this nation gets, the harder it is to manage!

It's easier to manage a few small ant villages, but once they start building a condo they become uncontrolable.

Increase in chiefs = Increase in opinions.

More people, more problems

This is anecdotal, but every teacher I know who has retired after 30+ years (which is a fair amount) say they would never do it again. The system is broken, and they blame it on both parties. Politics has gotten involved with the education of our kids, and neither political party truly knows how to do it. Teachers unions were dumb and got in bed with the Democrats because they thought that they would follow the recommendations of those unions, but that never happened either. Kennedy and Bush had no clue what they were doing with NCLB, and the unions fought it all the way but lost. The quality of education has been doing down hill for decades, but over the past 15 it has increased speed at an exceptional pace due to the idiocy in Washington.

(01-06-2015 12:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Talking about unions have to come into this question too. I can't imagine dealing with the public without the oprotections the unions afford us. This is the first Rubicon for me in dealing with the right. People who teach on here in areas where there is not union protections. Do you have trouble with Nepotism or favoritism? I've seen it a couple of times in my career in coaching. Coaches are not afforded union protections. We had a softball coach who did a nice job, but he didn't play a board members kid. The kid who played in front of her was better but Dad didn't see it that way. Things got real sideways. One AD stuck up for the coach. That AD lost his job. New AD replaced the softball coach. Within three years the softball program was in shambles board members hand picked coach quit. I can see that playing out all over if we lost public unions. Board members daughter graduates with a degree in accounting. Accounting teacher who is at 25 years on the salary scale loses her job in the spring. New accounting teacher steps into her job the next fall. Rinse repeat. In public schools how do you avoid that scenario?

The flip side is that the unions seem to have this absolutism about defending a teacher no matter how crappy they may be. When my daughter first started teaching in Cleveland, she agreed to be the school steward. After one year, she resigned because she couldn't stand defending teachers she knew were incompetent and/or lazy.

Because of unions, schools end up with rubber rooms like in NYC, where the worst teachers are warehoused since they can not be fired.

(01-06-2015 01:18 PM)mlb Wrote:  This is anecdotal, but every teacher I know who has retired after 30+ years (which is a fair amount) say they would never do it again. The system is broken, and they blame it on both parties. Politics has gotten involved with the education of our kids, and neither political party truly knows how to do it. Teachers unions were dumb and got in bed with the Democrats because they thought that they would follow the recommendations of those unions, but that never happened either. Kennedy and Bush had no clue what they were doing with NCLB, and the unions fought it all the way but lost. The quality of education has been doing down hill for decades, but over the past 15 it has increased speed at an exceptional pace due to the idiocy in Washington.

Yep, 100% agree. FWIW my Mom retired from Indian Hill 8 years ago and every year toward the end admin got more "political" as opposed to supportive, and parents got worse and worse. One time I asked my Mom how it was possible to teach so long and never receive a visit from the Dep of Education in Washington. It should be abolished.

(01-05-2015 07:52 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Maybe privatization is the answer.

Today our school is dry running the new standardized computer tests. On top of this we will have at least 2 more weeks of testing. So now we take 15 odd days to test. It's crazy. Then think about the kids who pass vs. the kids who need to take it over again. So next fall we will take another 5 more days out of the calculus. I didn't start out my career like this. Then to think I am going to have to teach nine more years on top of what I signed up for to get a retirement. Tell your Mom SuperFly about the changes that were made to the retirement system. I can't believe she would think they were fair. I know the answer to this but ask her if she thinks it's fair the current retirees have not taken any cuts? Why do you think that is Spin Room??? BECAUSE THAT'S THE GOP's base!!!!! They have really screwed over the people 20+years into the system. I didn't even get a free jar of vaseline.

(01-06-2015 08:42 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(01-05-2015 08:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Privatization will only give good education to the folks with the most money.

Isn't it better if at least some people get a good education? Or would you prefer if everyone gets a poor, but equal, education?

What do you consider a good education. Because of you mean being able to read, write, and do math, most kids in public education get that.

(01-06-2015 11:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-06-2015 08:42 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(01-05-2015 08:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Privatization will only give good education to the folks with the most money.

Isn't it better if at least some people get a good education? Or would you prefer if everyone gets a poor, but equal, education?

What do you consider a good education. Because of you mean being able to read, write, and do math, most kids in public education get that.

At what level? If a 16 year old can successfully add 2 plus 2, do you consider that a "good" education? If an 18 year old struggles, but is capable of, reading and filling out a job application, do you consider them "educated"?

Education statistics

Quote:First ask yourself why the privates of today (in general) out perform their public counterparts. To me, there is one overriding factor and that is that their parents spend money to send their child to the private school. They have skin in the game and are not going to allow Junior to waste their money.

I find that a rather cynical analysis which IMO is actually ass-backwards. When parents are sufficiently concerned about their child's education, they will make the effort to support them whether they are in a public school (paid for by their taxes, so it's still a waste if they don't do well) or a private school.

I realize that it is only anecdotal, but the stories presented in "Waiting for Superman" show how parental involvement transcends "the wealthy."

(01-07-2015 08:52 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(01-06-2015 11:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-06-2015 08:42 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(01-05-2015 08:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Privatization will only give good education to the folks with the most money.

Isn't it better if at least some people get a good education? Or would you prefer if everyone gets a poor, but equal, education?

What do you consider a good education. Because of you mean being able to read, write, and do math, most kids in public education get that.

At what level? If a 16 year old can successfully add 2 plus 2, do you consider that a "good" education? If an 18 year old struggles, but is capable of, reading and filling out a job application, do you consider them "educated"?

Education statistics

Interesting article you linked to. That article lists most literate and most illiterate cities in America but the study used to make that determination even stated that their data was not about whether people could read but rather, whether people do read. In essence, their study was based on 6 categories: residents’ educational attainment, newspaper circulation, use of online resources, the library system, and periodical publishing resources. They didn't use reading ability as a criteria.

Thanks for sharing that link Socratic. Interesting stats.

(01-06-2015 12:36 PM)NewJersey GATA Wrote:  I have 4 teachers in my family and they express their displeasures of parents more than anything else. Parents don't take responsibility and are irresponsible towards their childs advancement in education.

I'm still confused why some people have kids!!! Just pull out

(01-06-2015 02:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Then to think I am going to have to teach nine more years on top of what I signed up for to get a retirement. Tell your Mom SuperFly about the changes that were made to the retirement system. I can't believe she would think they were fair. I know the answer to this but ask her if she thinks it's fair the current retirees have not taken any cuts? Why do you think that is Spin Room??? BECAUSE THAT'S THE GOP's base!!!!! They have really screwed over the people 20+years into the system. I didn't even get a free jar of vaseline.

My mom taught until she was 62, and only stopped because she was forced to due to the changes in Ohio's STRS (State Teachers Retirement System). She would fully disagree with you that a person should be able to retire at 52. She'd have taught until 65 if it wouldn't have cost her money in retirement. She still substitutes to this day.