# Schools Not Doing Their Job?



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

According to this article, the school system is not doing their job, by preparing kids for the real world.  Now, I can't speak for every school in the world, but I feel that while it is the job of the schools to teach kids, its also the job of the kids to want to do well, and the parents of the kids, to constantly re-enforce the fact that they need to do well in school, if they want to be able to go out, get a good job and make something of themselves.

The second part of this article caught my eye, when it spoke of parents not wanting to teach math at home.  Now, I will admit, that things do change, so what one childs parents learned, may have and probably did change, however, that isn't an excuse or reason to just throw up your hands and give up.  There are resources available, such as tutors and i'm sure if the child was having a hard time in a subject, staying after for some assistance from the teacher, is also an option.  

So, do you feel that the schools are doing their job or is this just a case of trying to blame someone else, for todays kids not doing well in the education department?


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

School should teach the following things:

History (local, national, global)
Compartive religion (not "you will be this religion" but explaing what differnit religions are like)
Three languages (English, Spanish, and a third)
How to use a comp. (it is the future after all)
How to do certain things that everyone should know how to do (cook, fill out taxes, get along with people...)
expose students to what differnit jobs would be like
And, foster creativity and a love of learning

Schools now, don't do much of that. Let's be honest, you will probably never need to know how to solve a matrix multiplcation problem unless you go into a specialized feild. So, it's pretty much pointless to teach that kind of skill in high school.


----------



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> School should teach the following things:
> 
> 1)History (local, national, global)
> 2)Compartive religion (not "you will be this religion" but explaing what differnit religions are like)
> ...


 
Hmm...lets see.  I've been out of school since 1991.  I'll address your above comments.

1) History is taught.  

2) Probably won't get too deep into that unless its a private school.

3) These have been offered for a long time.  

4) This has been done and still is.

5) Those classes are offered.

6) Usually in your Jr. or Sr. year, they offer work study programs.

7) Well, this is similar to another discussion we had on schools.  It shold be a no-brainer that having at the least, a HS education, is needed if you want to get somewhere in the workplace.

Now, I'll agree with you on your last statement...alot of the stuff that is taught, probably could be substituted with something more applicable to life, unless you're entering a field that will require you to know certain things, ie: a doctor, chemist, etc.  Do we use fancy math in everyday life?  I know I dont at my job, but I know the basics.

Getting back to your above 7 suggestions.  Are you saying that those things are not done in todays schools?


----------



## Nolerama (Jul 1, 2008)

Do you think school's purpose (at least US public schools) has shifted from institutions of learning, to glorified babysitting?

I do, to an extent. I went to pubic school in the 'burbs, and had an excellent education that prepped me for college...

However, living in the city, there's a public school whose average graduate reading level is still 3rd grade.

It's sad. Teacher's don't get paid well and are not treated professionally, and inner city kids don't have many options outside of school; many have difficult home lives.

There are no academic extra curricular activities, either.

But this particular school has four principals, and a school board that
 a few years ago, paid its superintendent way too much in light of the district's lacking performance.

When it comes to city schools (a portion of what's being discussed) I don't think anyone cares anymore. In the event that I have children, and they become school-aged, they're going to private school.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> School should teach the following things:


 
Well, let's take a look at this list, shall we?  I teach in a middle school, so my greatest experience is with grades 6-8 (for those from other school systems, that ages 11-14)



CuongNhuka said:


> History (local, national, global)



6th grade:  History, culture, and geography of Canada, and Mexico
7th grade:  World geography, including history, culture, economic systems, religions, etc.
8th grade:  American History, starting with Columbus and working up through the Constitution; the rest is taught in high school



CuongNhuka said:


> Compartive religion (not "you will be this religion" but explaing what differnit religions are like)



See above... and remember that lots of parents don't want their kids taught this - we have kids pulled from social studies/history/geography all the time during units that teach comparative religions, because their parents don't want the children "exposed", for a wide variety of reasons.



CuongNhuka said:


> Three languages (English, Spanish, and a third)



Why 3?  And why Spanish?  I understand what you're saying - but this is an English-speaking country.  As an English-speaking, tax-paying native, I'm tired of my money going to print everything the government produces twice.  There was an initiative that made the ballot in Colorado some years ago that would have mandated that all government employees speak, read and write English to a particular standard (I believe it was about 5th grade) so that the government could quit having to publish everything in English and Spanish, with a significant savings in cost - it was voted down as "prejudicial" to native speakers of Spanish.  Well, what about people who speak other languages?  There are currently 17 languages spoken at my school - and most of them are Asian and Eastern European, such as Czech, although Spanish is also well represented.  Should we publish all the school notices in all 17 languages?  _Teach_ all 17 languages?  It's a slippery slope to start traveling down.

That said, yes, I think that the schools need to teach foreign languages, and I think they need to start in elementary school, when kids learn languages the most easily.  But that's hard to do without money, and harder still while attempting to improve reading, writing, math, and science scores on standardized tests as mandated by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (more commonly known as No Child Left Behind, a great idea that was incredibly badly implemented).  Schools have been dropping untested subjects at a furious rate, because too much funding is tied to test scores.  I'll get back to this one later.



CuongNhuka said:


> How to use a comp. (it is the future after all)



Every kid in my middle school takes at least 2 computer classes in 3 years... and very few of them need those classes, given the proliferation of computers.  And you still have to know _what_ to do with it - which brings us back to reading, writing and math; if you can't do those things, and worse, don't know _when_ or _which_ things to do, a computer isn't much help.



CuongNhuka said:


> How to do certain things that everyone should know how to do (cook, fill out taxes, get along with people...)



I learned all these things from my parents - and I believe it is the parents' job to teach life skills.  Certainly, the schools can reinforce these things - but these are things kids should learn at home.  The schools are already doing too much parenting as it is.



CuongNhuka said:


> expose students to what differnit jobs would be like



Have you heard of summer jobs?  Internships?  Take your child to work day?  Again - the schools can reinforce these things, and offer opportunities the parents don't have - my school has Career Day every year for the 7th and 8th grade, and had over 50 careers represented this past year, and there are career planning and exploration units included in various classes - but this is a life skill, and life skills should be taught _everywhere_, by _everyone_ kids come into contact with.  It should not be limited to the schools, nor should the schools be the primary source.



CuongNhuka said:


> And, foster creativity and a love of learning


 
And we do that as best we can, while still trying to meet the requirements of NCLB.  Face it, when your job is on the line unless all the little kiddies (who couldn't care less about the state tests) do well on the test - you're going to teach the things that are on the test.  As I said above, NCLB is a law with a great idea that was lost in a crappy implementation.  To properly determine if students are making progress, students need to be tested in small bits, regularly, using data from the classroom in the same format in which learning actually takes place - not in one massive annual exam that has no effect on a student's learning, and therefore no incentive to do well.  From the article:



> Larry Michalec, a computer programmer in San Diego, called the testing a waste of time. "They're standardized and people aren't standardized," he said. "Children get taught to the test. They get taught to take the test. They don't get taught to learn."



And this is the other point.  Children are individuals, and standardized testing is _not_ individualized.  Colleges have been placing less and less emphasis on SAT and ACT scores for years, because school performance has turned out to be a much better predictor of college success than the college board tests.  Yes, there are careers for which you must demonstrate your knowledge via a test for certification purposes (CPAs, lawyers, teachers, etc.) but for most people, once you're out of school, you'll never take another test again - but you will use the skills you were taught to perform your job, and that itself is the real test, whether or not you can do your job properly on a regular basis.



CuongNhuka said:


> Schools now, don't do much of that.



Your school may not do much of it - at least, your perception is certainly that they don't - but not being at your school, I can't say.  Mine does... to those who are paying attention, anyway.



CuongNhuka said:


> Let's be honest, you will probably never need to know how to solve a matrix multiplcation problem unless you go into a specialized feild. So, it's pretty much pointless to teach that kind of skill in high school.



True, you may not - but the purpose of learning higher math is rarely to be able to do higher math later; the purpose of learning higher math is that it teaches logical processing in a way that nothing else can.  But again, that's something that few people understand at the time they're being taught it.


----------



## CoryKS (Jul 1, 2008)

Math, Science, English, History.  And please, for the love of all that is holy, start teaching them Logic and Economics.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

MJS said:


> Hmm...lets see. I've been out of school since 1991. I'll address your above comments.
> 
> 1) History is taught.
> 
> ...


 
It's complicated.

1) I said Global (is taught), National (is taught, but is mostly "this is why we're the best") and local (is not taught in most schools). I also forgot Government and law (gov mandatory, law optional if offered)

2) Actually, the school district near me (not the one I went to, but near me) does offer an introduction to differnit religions

3) I don't mean offer, I mean they are required. In most Eurpoean and Asian countrys you are required to take 2 or 3 languages, because in the buisness world, you aren't of much use unless you can speak a few languages.

4) Again, I mean require, not offer. The computer classes I took (that were required) were typing classes in middle school. I mean more advanced things using a computer, and making it mandatory.

5) Again, make it required.

6) The work study programs at my school required you to know that is what you wanted to do. You had to have a few requirements (classes) completed, and then the class takes up three periods. So, more then a few students don't really bother. I mean have a class that exposes students to a few differnit career feilds. Like this week, being a cop, next week being a teacher, the week after that being an accountant, and so on. So that the students get a more overall sense of differnit carrers that they may be interested in. And, at the end of the week, a representative from that carrer comes in and hands out info to those that are interested.

7) True, but quite a few people that I know from differnit schools, hated being taught in school, and (because of it) decided that they don't want to go to college. They see it as nothing but work, with there own ideas being stiffled. If you're entire experience with something like education is just one horrid afair after another, you aren't going to want to continue your education?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 1, 2008)

MJS said:


> According to this article, the school system is not doing their job, by preparing kids for the real world. Now, I can't speak for every school in the world, but I feel that while it is the job of the schools to teach kids, its also the job of the kids to want to do well, and the parents of the kids, to constantly re-enforce the fact that they need to do well in school, if they want to be able to go out, get a good job and make something of themselves.
> 
> The second part of this article caught my eye, when it spoke of parents not wanting to teach math at home. Now, I will admit, that things do change, so what one childs parents learned, may have and probably did change, however, that isn't an excuse or reason to just throw up your hands and give up. There are resources available, such as tutors and i'm sure if the child was having a hard time in a subject, staying after for some assistance from the teacher, is also an option.
> 
> So, do you feel that the schools are doing their job or is this just a case of trying to blame someone else, for todays kids not doing well in the education department?


 
I think that parents need to be heavily involved with their childrens education.  This is one of the weak links that I see in certain school districts.  I know in my childrens school that I am heavily involved and this seems to affect their attention to school details.  I notice the exact same from all of the other parents that are heavily involved as well.  If parents place a heavy importance on school then more than likely those children will do very well.  If they do not however...... well the result can be the opposite.


----------



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> It's complicated.
> 
> 1) I said Global (is taught), National (is taught, but is mostly "this is why we're the best") and local (is not taught in most schools). I also forgot Government and law (gov mandatory, law optional if offered)


 
Keep in mind, that many times, the basics are what is taught. You're not going to teach someone in HS, what would be covered in college.



> 2) Actually, the school district near me (not the one I went to, but near me) does offer an introduction to differnit religions


 
As Kacey said, many people do not want their child exposed to a religion other than what they are. 



> 3) I don't mean offer, I mean they are required. In most Eurpoean and Asian countrys you are required to take 2 or 3 languages, because in the buisness world, you aren't of much use unless you can speak a few languages.


 
Languages usually fall under the electives section.  I will give this to you though...I do think that being able to speak another language is good to know.  I suppose the next question would be, which one?  



> 4) Again, I mean require, not offer. The computer classes I took (that were required) were typing classes in middle school. I mean more advanced things using a computer, and making it mandatory.


 
See the link at the bottom.  This is what is offered at the HS where I went.  What you speak of is again, in the electives.





> 5) Again, make it required.


 
Again, electives.



> 6) The work study programs at my school required you to know that is what you wanted to do. You had to have a few requirements (classes) completed, and then the class takes up three periods. So, more then a few students don't really bother. I mean have a class that exposes students to a few differnit career feilds. Like this week, being a cop, next week being a teacher, the week after that being an accountant, and so on. So that the students get a more overall sense of differnit carrers that they may be interested in. And, at the end of the week, a representative from that carrer comes in and hands out info to those that are interested.


 
Not a bad idea.



> 7) True, but quite a few people that I know from differnit schools, hated being taught in school, and (because of it) decided that they don't want to go to college. They see it as nothing but work, with there own ideas being stiffled. If you're entire experience with something like education is just one horrid afair after another, you aren't going to want to continue your education?


 
They hated being taught?  How else are you going to learn unless you're taught?  Sounds like they have no desire to even be in school to me.  And those are the kids that will end up working in BK for their career. Also keep in mind that college isnt for everyone.  True, in many jobs today, they want that degree, but there are many jobs that dont require one, some of which pay pretty good too. 

http://www.cromwellschools.org/chs/site/files/chscoursestudies08-09-pri.pdf


----------



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I think that parents need to be heavily involved with their childrens education. This is one of the weak links that I see in certain school districts. I know in my childrens school that I am heavily involved and this seems to affect their attention to school details. I notice the exact same from all of the other parents that are heavily involved as well. If parents place a heavy importance on school then more than likely those children will do very well. If they do not however...... well the result can be the opposite.


 
I agree.  Mine were involved in my education.  Afterall, if the child sees that his parents have no interest in their schooling, its showing them that they don't care, so why put any effort into doing well.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 1, 2008)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I think that parents need to be heavily involved with their childrens education.  This is one of the weak links that I see in certain school districts.  I know in my childrens school that I am heavily involved and this seems to affect their attention to school details.  I notice the exact same from all of the other parents that are heavily involved as well.  If parents place a heavy importance on school then more than likely those children will do very well.  If they do not however...... well the result can be the opposite.



This is, indeed, the key - I can walk into a classroom and tell, with 95% or better accuracy, whose parents are paying attention to, and putting importance on, the kids' education.  They are the students who are attentive, prepared, ask for help, and are generally what students should be.  The ones whose parents are not emphasizing education are the opposite.  There are a few exceptions, as there are to any rule - but in general, when the parents are involved, the children are better students, and get more out of their education, with much less need for parenting from the schools, as opposed to the reinforcement of core values (rather than the direction instruction) that schools should be doing.


----------



## Ray (Jul 1, 2008)

Even with parents being heavily involved etc, there are some students who will not learn.  Look at George Carlin and his decision to leave school early because he had his life planned.  

My youngest son (now 19) decided a long time ago that school was, for the most part, not necessary for his success in life.  I hope he is successful in his chosen endeavor.  He plays a fantastic classical guitar but has instead decided to make his millions with "death metal":  http://www.myspace.com/fallingtograce


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

MJS said:


> They hated being taught? How else are you going to learn unless you're taught? Sounds like they have no desire to even be in school to me. And those are the kids that will end up working in BK for their career. Also keep in mind that college isnt for everyone. True, in many jobs today, they want that degree, but there are many jobs that dont require one, some of which pay pretty good too.


 
It's more of the way they were taught. That is, "read the first four chapters of the book, and fill out these papers. If you have a question, re-read the book". Many of those teachers (not all, just those kinds of teachers) do very little work. The way they grade there homework as you are either completly right, or completly wrong. There is no "I see your rational here, even if it's not exactly what I wanted". They give tests on scantrons (which those 'fill in a bubble, and a machine will grade it' things).

Also, the teachers who teach that way, don't seem to know the material themselves. A great example was when we were doing Greek Myths in English. The Myths were updated so people could understand them a little bit better. I asked the teacher why the Myths sounded wrong (keep in mind I spent 6-9th grade reading Greek Myths). She said she didn't know. I checked one of the Myths (Pandoras Box), and it was way off. I asked the teacher if we were going to cover the orginal Myth (I had figured out that these were not the orginal, and that she had not mentioned that). She told me she didn't know any, and was pretty sure she wouldn't have time to cover them. She wouldn't even tell the class that these were not the orignal Myths. So, there is quite a few high school students/alumni that think Pandora opened the box with a crow bar (which wasn't invented till centuries later), that she found in a garage (I shouldn't have to say it), and that one of the evils she released was tourism. 
I have no problem with an updated version to help people get the Myths, but you should either follow up with the real thing, or mention that these are updates. Again, this is an just an example.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 1, 2008)

I would like to add that in some cases school CAN'T do there job, too much is expected of them by state and federal authorities.

And since I once worked for my states Education Department and while in a meeting with one of the Deputy Commissioners he did say the following

"Teachers should have nothing to do with planning curriculum" 

Apparently it is done much better by statistician and PhDs that never taught a day in their life


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> It's complicated.
> 
> 1) I said Global (is taught), National (is taught, but is mostly "this is why we're the best") and local (is not taught in most schools). I also forgot Government and law (gov mandatory, law optional if offered)
> 
> ...


 
Y'know... your post is a frighteningly powerful indictment of your education.  Multiple, consistent spelling errors.  Grammar problems throughout...


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 1, 2008)

Kacey said:


> That said, yes, I think that the schools need to teach foreign languages, and I think they need to start in elementary school, when kids learn languages the most easily.  But that's hard to do without money, and harder still while attempting to improve reading, writing, math, and science scores on standardized tests as mandated by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (more commonly known as No Child Left Behind, a great idea that was incredibly badly implemented).  Schools have been dropping untested subjects at a furious rate, because too much funding is tied to test scores.
> _____
> 
> And we do that as best we can, while still trying to meet the requirements of NCLB.  Face it, when your job is on the line unless all the little kiddies (who couldn't care less about the state tests) do well on the test - you're going to teach the things that are on the test.
> ...


A cogent and incisive case for why education is hemorrhaging not just high schoolers (dropouts), but teachers as well. My daughter left after six years in the classroom. And I'm pulling the plug as soon as possible myself. It's not really education anymore, it's standardization, testing to make sure the standardization 'took', and separating as *lost merchandise* those who don't fit on the conveyor belt anymore.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> It's more of the way they were taught. That is, "read the first four chapters of the book, and fill out these papers. If you have a question, re-read the book". Many of those teachers (not all, just those kinds of teachers) do very little work. The way they grade there homework as you are either completly right, or completly wrong. There is no "I see your rational here, even if it's not exactly what I wanted". They give tests on scantrons (which those 'fill in a bubble, and a machine will grade it' things).
> 
> Also, the teachers who teach that way, don't seem to know the material themselves. A great example was when we were doing Greek Myths in English. The Myths were updated so people could understand them a little bit better. I asked the teacher why the Myths sounded wrong (keep in mind I spent 6-9th grade reading Greek Myths). She said she didn't know. I checked one of the Myths (Pandoras Box), and it was way off. I asked the teacher if we were going to cover the orginal Myth (I had figured out that these were not the orginal, and that she had not mentioned that). She told me she didn't know any, and was pretty sure she wouldn't have time to cover them. She wouldn't even tell the class that these were not the orignal Myths. So, there is quite a few high school students/alumni that think Pandora opened the box with a crow bar (which wasn't invented till centuries later), that she found in a garage (I shouldn't have to say it), and that one of the evils she released was tourism.
> I have no problem with an updated version to help people get the Myths, but you should either follow up with the real thing, or mention that these are updates. Again, this is an just an example.


 
First -- as the son of a teacher, I'm going to have to say that I suspect you have little knowledge of what a teacher really does.  Or how much work they put into it.  There's a lot of work that goes into teaching that you simply don't see.

Second -- just exactly when do you think the lever (a crowbar is just a lever) was invented?  It's one of the earliest simple tools...


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> Y'know... your post is a frighteningly powerful indictment of your education. Multiple, consistent spelling errors. Grammar problems throughout...


 
I'm curious what you're trying to say here. Spelling and grammar is a skill, and little else. It is also, by no means an indication of intelligence/education. If that is the route you were going down.

Also, when the book says says "she went into the garage and grabbed a crowbar" I don't think it meant just any old lever, it is rather specific to that kind of lever, which wasn't used (as a term to describe a such a lever) until around the year 1400. Which is far after the end of Greek Civilization.


----------



## Cryozombie (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> Also, when the book says says "she went into the garage and grabbed a crowbar" I don't think it meant just any old lever, it is rather specific to that kind of lever, which wasn't used (as a term to describe a such a lever) until around the year 1400. Which is far after the end of Greek Civilization.


 
Neverminding the fact ancient Greeks didnt have garages either...


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

Cryozombie said:


> Neverminding the fact ancient Greeks didnt have garages either...


 
Actually, in my intial post were I mentioned this incident, I did imply that same fact. JKS seems to have decided to ignore every part of my post up until the part were a crowbar is a kind of lever.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> It's more of the way they were taught. That is, "read the first four chapters of the book, and fill out these papers. If you have a question, re-read the book". Many of those teachers (not all, just those kinds of teachers) do very little work. The way they grade there homework as you are either completly right, or completly wrong. There is no "I see your rational here, even if it's not exactly what I wanted". They give tests on scantrons (which those 'fill in a bubble, and a machine will grade it' things).


 
Three words for you.  Welcome to College.  Wait, no....Welcome to Life.  

Maybe the teacher in question is starting at too young of an age, but this is how it is done.  A good deal of my college professors lectured from slides, went faster than any human could follow, and required, not expected that you came to class with an understanding of the material.  A whole lot more were teaching the class simply because it was required for them to continue their research or they drew the short straw.  Granted, I'm not saying that all teachers are bad in any way.  While I don't think that teachers should be teaching a subject that they have no interest in, sometimes it is required.

But school, in general, not high school or college is there to prepare you for life.  If you think that anyone is going to hold you by the hand and teach you explicitly everything you'll ever need to know, you're mistaken.  Well, fast food restaurants will do that to ensure standardization.

While I highly value (especially since I'm getting my Masters right now) teachers who grade based on your approach and method, rather than simply your answer....unfortunately, it does no good.  If I design a bridge and it collapses, no one cares about my method, just whether it fell down or not.

Not even the military will do that.  We value troops with the ability to think for themselves and to solve problems creatively.  Read ahead, study, learn more than you should know - that is how you get promoted, even in the military.

Personally, I think that schools should teach MUCH more basic english and grammar.  I feel this is highly lacking in today's schools.  I can't tell you how many times I have to correct basic spelling and grammar on reports that go across my desk.  For example, in my previous two jobs, I kept a sign in my office detailing the difference between your and you're and their, there, and they're.  If I turn in a report, letter, even an e-mail to my boss with basic grammar and spelling problems, not only does it show carelessness, but it shows that I can't be trusted to do the job right the first time.

(I guess this means that I have to start double proofreading all of my posts.   )


----------



## Gordon Nore (Jul 1, 2008)

Kacey said:


> And we do that as best we can, while still trying to meet the requirements of NCLB. Face it, when your job is on the line unless all the little kiddies (who couldn't care less about the state tests) do well on the test - you're going to teach the things that are on the test. As I said above, NCLB is a law with a great idea that was lost in a crappy implementation. To properly determine if students are making progress, students need to be tested in small bits, regularly, using data from the classroom in the same format in which learning actually takes place - not in one massive annual exam that has no effect on a student's learning, and therefore no incentive to do well...



Absolutely right. The state or provincial stats are political tools. The first person a test should make sense to is the child who is taking it, then the family, and the school, and the school district, and the taxpayers. Standardized testing is designed to spit out results to be debated by taxpayers and used by politicians to validate policy changes.

About ten years ago, when the Province of Ontario introduced standardized tests in grades 3, 6, and 9, my then eight-year-old asked, "Why can't [Ontario Premier] Mike Harris just look at my work." It was a very good question. 

Getting back to the article in the initial post, I was very discouraged to read this... 



> Asked what subjects should be given more time in school, more than a third said math. English was a distant second, at 21 percent. A tiny fraction picked art, music and the sciences, such as biology and chemistry.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 1, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Three words for you. Welcome to College. Wait, no....Welcome to Life.


 
There's a differnce between expecting some one who should already have a basic understanding of a subject to be able to pick up on material, and telling a group of highschoolers (who know nothing about Greek culture) to read a bunch of Greek Myths. There's also a differnce between your boss expecting you to be able to figure out what you should be doing with out his saying anything, and your boss not knowing how to do the job of the people under him. That's what I'm complaining about in my posts. 

There are too many teachers who are simply inept. Not all are. But, there are enough to screw up the whole system.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> I'm curious what you're trying to say here. Spelling and grammar is a skill, and little else. It is also, by no means an indication of intelligence/education. If that is the route you were going down.
> 
> Also, when the book says says "she went into the garage and grabbed a crowbar" I don't think it meant just any old lever, it is rather specific to that kind of lever, which wasn't used (as a term to describe a such a lever) until around the year 1400. Which is far after the end of Greek Civilization.


 


CuongNhuka said:


> Actually, in my intial post were I mentioned this incident, I did imply that same fact. JKS seems to have decided to ignore every part of my post up until the part were a crowbar is a kind of lever.


 
Actually, I did read your posts.  In their entirety.  Your entire complaint is apparently that they modernized the myth, putting things in terms that might make sense to a young, modern reader.  Was the essence of the story still there?  Pandora is entrusted with a box, and told not to open it. Upon her failure in that trust, she unleashed all the evils and woes into the world, leaving only hope remaining at the last.  Now, I do agree that adding tourism to the list of evils is a bit of a stretch... but it didn't alter the meaning of the story all that much.  And using "crowbar" instead of "pry bar" or "lever" or just "big honking stick to pull with"... Not a problem at all.  Again, while the TERM "crowbar" may well be of relatively recent origin -- I suspect that if we looked upon the tools used by the ancient Egyptians or Mayans or Romans to build their various pyramids, temples, and aquaducts... we'd find some things that were pretty recognizably crowbars.  (In fact, if you really want to get into comparative mythology, I'll bet you'll find that there are quite a few variants of Pandora's box...)

As to spelling... Yes, it's a skill.  But it's important enough that the Commonwealth of Virginia actually REQUIRES spelling tests in the police academy... and so do other states.  Failing to use the proper word, or spelling it incorrectly obscures your meaning, and may indeed make you appear less educated.  Misuse of "their", "they're" and "there" are glaring examples -- and can change the entire meaning of sentence.  

But improper grammar... That's almost always indicative of incomplete and sloppy thought -- unless it's clearly being used for effect.  I'll use the occasional "yep" or "y'know" or even worse constructions to convey a more colloquial tone, since I can't use my tone of voice or expression.  I'm lazy about the emoticons... so I make use of careful phrasing.  

You see, if you make writing carefully and effectively a habit, you'll never regret it.  In fact, it may well ensure that when you have little time, but must convey events or an idea well -- you'll be able to do so.  Officers who habitually write sloppy reports don't magically write a good report when they have to cover serious use of force or other such issues.  Officers who habitually write good reports don't fail to do so when they need to.  Similarly, people who write carefully in all their writing don't accidentally send the company president an email that makes him (or her) wonder why they've set a monkey loose in the corporation. 

I suppose I'll close with my standard recommendation: Strunk & White.  Buy it.  Study it.  Apply it.  You won't regret doing so.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jul 1, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> I suppose I'll close with my standard recommendation: Strunk & White.  Buy it.  Study it.  Apply it.  You won't regret doing so.


That's a recommendation with which I doubt anyone can quibble.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> There's a differnce between expecting some one who should already have a basic understanding of a subject to be able to pick up on material, and telling a group of highschoolers (who know nothing about Greek culture) to read a bunch of Greek Myths. There's also a differnce between your boss expecting you to be able to figure out what you should be doing with out his saying anything, and your boss not knowing how to do the job of the people under him. That's what I'm complaining about in my posts.
> 
> There are too many teachers who are simply inept. Not all are. But, there are enough to screw up the whole system.



And this makes teachers different from other industries, how?  I'm not saying that it's right - it's not; even more than many other professions, teachers need to be highly competent - but saying that doesn't mean that highly qualified teachers will suddenly walk out of the woodwork and say "Hi!  I'm here to be hired!".  In addition, there's an incredible attrition rate, especially among newer teachers (those who have been teaching less than 5 years) - one report puts the attrition rate for new teachers at 40-50% - from the same article:


> About 19 percent of these beginners who left teaching said that they did so as a result of a school staffing action, such as a cutback, layoff, termination, school reorganization, or school closing. Another 42 percent cited personal reasons, including pregnancy, child rearing, health problems, and family moves.
> Around 39 percent said that they left to pursue a better job or another career, and about 29 percent said that dissatisfaction with teaching as a career or with their specific job was a main reason. These final two reasons&#8212;pursuit of another job and dissatisfaction&#8212; together play a major role in about two-thirds of all beginning teacher attrition.


Another article confirms these statistics, as follows:


> Nationally, the average turnover for all teachers is 17 percent, and in urban school districts specifically, the number jumps to 20 percent, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. The National Commission on Teaching and America's Future proffers starker numbers, estimating that one-third of all new teachers leave after three years, and 46 percent are gone within five years.


Teaching is _hard_ - and one of the factors that makes it hardest is the students.... students who think they know more than the teachers, students who act out in class, students with poor home lives, students who can't be bothered to do the work, students who were passed on from earlier grades because they were too old, students with special needs (physical, mental, emotional, medical, etc.), students who weren't parented, students whose parents want their child to have 100% of the teacher's attention at the expense of the other students, etc.

Teaching pay is poor - yes, teachers get a lot of time off, but teachers also have to pay for their own continuing education, required by law, where most other career fields pay for their employees' continuing education, and pay a higher salary for similar education and experience.  In addition, teachers work a lot of overtime - I, for example, average 9 hours per day on work days, and 3-5 hours per weekend, and there are lots of teachers who spend more time on their work than I do - and we don't get paid for it.

For this, we get to deal with children and teens like yourself, who think that everything we've taught you is useless.  &#8220;When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished by how much he'd learned in seven years.&#8221; - Mark Twain.

No offense intended, but you are (as you are so upset at being reminded of) young, and of limited experience.  That does not make your opinion invalid - but it does mean that you have less experience than many of the people to whom you are speaking, and, while ideals and enthusiasm are wonderful, they will not get you through the real world.  You are welcome - and invited - to argue from your viewpoint, but be aware that people will disagree with you, both because of your youth and your inexperience, as well as because different people have different viewpoints.  Stop taking it as a dig, and start taking it as an opportunity to expand your horizons, and become a more complete, well-rounded person.  You appear to have a decent potential for success (not something I say to just any teen) and you have a wealth of information to draw upon here; don't waste it by insisting that only your viewpoint can be correct.  You think your school has inadequately prepared you for the world - prepare yourself.  You think teachers have done their jobs poorly - advocate for better teacher training and standards.  But don't sit here and ***** about how the world "done did you wrong" - lots of people had lives far worse than yours, and you aren't garnering any sympathy with your stance; instead, people see you as young, angry, opinionated, and unwilling to learn.  Is that really the impression you want people to have of you?

A last thought - I took the time to write this because I think you're worth the effort, as do others who think the same... please respond as if you really _are_ as worthy as many people here think you are.


----------



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> It's more of the way they were taught. That is, "read the first four chapters of the book, and fill out these papers. If you have a question, re-read the book". Many of those teachers (not all, just those kinds of teachers) do very little work. The way they grade there homework as you are either completly right, or completly wrong. There is no "I see your rational here, even if it's not exactly what I wanted". They give tests on scantrons (which those 'fill in a bubble, and a machine will grade it' things).


 
So let me get this right.  The teacher hands out work, the students do the work.  If its right, then fine.  If its wrong, fine, its wrong.  If its not quite right, but not quite wrong, thats supposed to be ok?  Hmm...lets use the Martial Arts as a reference.  If I am sitting on a testing board and I want to see technique A, I expect to see tech. A, otherwise, if I see something else, if I see part of A, but they can't remember the rest, thats supposed to be ok?  

Do you know the job of a teacher?  I'm not talking about what you think you see, I'm talking about things that you don't see.  How do you know what they do/don't do, on a daily basis?  



> Also, the teachers who teach that way, don't seem to know the material themselves. A great example was when we were doing Greek Myths in English. The Myths were updated so people could understand them a little bit better. I asked the teacher why the Myths sounded wrong (keep in mind I spent 6-9th grade reading Greek Myths). She said she didn't know. I checked one of the Myths (Pandoras Box), and it was way off. I asked the teacher if we were going to cover the orginal Myth (I had figured out that these were not the orginal, and that she had not mentioned that). She told me she didn't know any, and was pretty sure she wouldn't have time to cover them. She wouldn't even tell the class that these were not the orignal Myths. So, there is quite a few high school students/alumni that think Pandora opened the box with a crow bar (which wasn't invented till centuries later), that she found in a garage (I shouldn't have to say it), and that one of the evils she released was tourism.
> I have no problem with an updated version to help people get the Myths, but you should either follow up with the real thing, or mention that these are updates. Again, this is an just an example.


 
This really has nothing to do with the subject at hand.  You said this:

"7) True, but quite a few people that I know from differnit schools, hated being taught in school, and (because of it) decided that they don't want to go to college. They see it as nothing but work, with there own ideas being stiffled. If you're entire experience with something like education is just one horrid afair after another, you aren't going to want to continue your education?"

to which I replied:

"They hated being taught? How else are you going to learn unless you're taught? Sounds like they have no desire to even be in school to me. And those are the kids that will end up working in BK for their career. Also keep in mind that college isnt for everyone. True, in many jobs today, they want that degree, but there are many jobs that dont require one, some of which pay pretty good too. "

This reads to me, that kids think that school should be easy, they should have things spoon fed to them, that the teachers should give all the answers, and take an incorrect answer as the students viewpoint.  Sorry..doesnt work that way!


----------



## MJS (Jul 1, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> I'm curious what you're trying to say here. Spelling and grammar is a skill, and little else. It is also, by no means an indication of intelligence/education. If that is the route you were going down.


 
I beg to differ.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 2, 2008)

MJS, the problem isn't handing out a bunch of work, it's that (in the case I cited), the teacher didn't know the material. That is in no way, shape or form right. I would love to see someone tell me otherwise.

Anyways. I've had a chance to sleep and think this whole thing over. Now, what occured to me (and this is just what I'm gathering from some of the other posts made) is that the people who are arguing against me seem to take the position that nothing is wrong with the system; or that there is something wrong with the system, but there is nothing that can be done to fix it. I (and a few other people) are taking the position that the system is broken, the horse is dead, lets find an alternative and move on. But, why am I the only one getting chewed out? Oh yah, I'm the only one suggesting an alternative.

But, here's the thing, every good idea, the ones that changed the world, almost all of them started with one person suggesting something to a group of people. Was that suggestion probably pretty bad? Yah, and so was mine. But, the debate that follows should be about figuring what is right and wrong with that suggestion, and using that debate as a framework to find an alternative that will work. And, if that isn't the purpose of such a debate, then I don't know what the point of a forum about politics and such is about. Or, why someone would post a topic like what the OP did. You guys aren't trying to figure out what parts of my suggestion (which I did come up with in just a few minutes) could be used. You're attacking my understanding of what a teacher does and my spelling.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jul 2, 2008)

> You guys aren't trying to figure out what parts of my suggestion (which I did come up with in just a few minutes) could be used



Pretty much none.

Your suggestion(s) simply comes down to the idea not of making people 'educated' but simply making them 'useful', which is at core the big problem with education today anyway.  Gone is the idea of educating them so they can seek a path of higher learning and higher creativity and thus creating a better society by creating more learned, more creative people.  In it's place is a model for making people a better fit as cogs in the machinery of the existing society.

That's actually really what we have today, and have for quite some time.  The only difference is that you've thrown off the illusion of education which we still offer lip service to, in exchange for the dystopic honesty that the education system's goal is simply to raise up better workers

Worth reading http://www.cantrip.org/gatto.html?


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jul 2, 2008)

> But, here's the thing, every good idea, the ones that changed the world, almost all of them started with one person suggesting something to a group of people.



A lot of Darwin Award Winners started out the same way. Doesn't mean much in itself.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 2, 2008)

"Are schools not doing their job?"

That's a really hard question to answer.

The argument for a mastery of language is an excellent one and mandated education in multiple languages can help that. Americans are, after all, one of the most poorly educated among industrialized nations when it comes to language, foreign language and mastery of literacy.  Multilingualism will aid in proper grammar, spelling and syntax.  A thorough education in language will underscore the learning in other subjects since our learning *is* largely language-based.

Standardized testing has a purpose and a place and it can work logically, but it cannot work thoroughly.  There will always be children who cannot express mathematical processes with language but will be able to calculate like crazy.  Students like this will consistently fail standardized math exams such as the WASL where spelling, grammar and punctuation in your explanation of process, calculation, reasoning and result must be perfect to score 2 points for a calculus problem, have no more than three errors total (calculation AND discussion) for one point.

And we need to figure out what we think a school's "job" is or should be.  Preparation for the real world would be a great thing, so how could that be achieved?

Integrating an exploration of personal skill and pointing to a course of study would be helpful.  Some high schools are incorporating the academy model, wherein the freshman year is about exploring likes, dislikes versus personality traits, analytical ability and talents.  By sophomore year, they are pointed towards a committed collection of studies pointed at potential post-high school education and/or employment.  Job shadowing, volunteerism and community outreach are among some required elements for culminating projects.

As to the grading of effort, it should be an element in the grading process and I think there is something to be said for grading individual progress more heavily than the standard laundry list alone.  Learning doesn't stop in high school, life will teach you or you will fail. That's the bottom line.

So in my opinion "fixing the problem" means identifying the problem first and frankly, there isn't only one problem and (exclusive of the Every Child Left Behind Act) it isn't the same problem across the U.S.  Inner city school problems are different than the problems in the 'burbs.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 2, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> MJS, the problem isn't handing out a bunch of work, it's that (in the case I cited), the teacher didn't know the material. That is in no way, shape or form right. I would love to see someone tell me otherwise.



No one is saying that the teacher not knowing the material is right - you're zeroing in on the one thing that truly bothers _you_, and missing the forest for the trees.



CuongNhuka said:


> Anyways. I've had a chance to sleep and think this whole thing over. Now, what occured to me (and this is just what I'm gathering from some of the other posts made) is that the people who are arguing against me seem to take the position that nothing is wrong with the system; or that there is something wrong with the system, but there is nothing that can be done to fix it. I (and a few other people) are taking the position that the system is broken, the horse is dead, lets find an alternative and move on. But, why am I the only one getting chewed out? Oh yah, I'm the only one suggesting an alternative.


 
You're not getting chewed out - you're being reasoned with, because those of us who are responding to you think you're worth responding to... but because we don't agree with everything you're saying, you think we're chewing you out.  You might want to think about that for a minute... in the context of why the Study was closed for several days.

Does the system need repair?  Of course it does - no one is disputing that.  But the problem is deeper than you realize, and the solution is more complex than your alternative will cover.  Where do the foreign language teachers come from?  Who designs the new curriculum?  When is it taught?  What is replaced to make room for it?  

The current state-mandated curriculum in Colorado requires 22 years of classroom instruction to complete... in a system that mandates attendance for 13 years.  Now, yes, there's some overlap in curricula - but if you sat down and taught each subject as listed in the state curriculum, there's more there than can be taught in the time available - and it's all on the CSAP (the Colorado State Assessment Program - our NCLB test).  This is due largely to people writing the curricula for various subjects without talking to each other.  So if it's this bad _now_ - when agencies are supposedly working _together_ - just how to intend to implement your idea?

Think about this:  Thomas Edison spent 60 years of his life searching for a way to transmit sound electronically; that is, he wanted to invent a telephone or a radio - the one thing he didn't find out how to do.  But look at what he did during his search!  Instead of focusing on what the *one, true, absolute only solution* to the problem is - start looking for ways to implement changes.  Start small.  See what it takes to make one change in the curriculum of your school - which means of your school district, and possibly of your state, as that's where the basic curricula are decided.  When you've done that - when you've determined what the first small change should be, and taken steps to implement it, and seen what it takes - then come back and tell us how to implement a massive change in how the education system is run, and in the goals of the education system - that is, to meet your goal to produce workers instead of thinkers - what that goal is going to take.  Then maybe you'll understand that we're not arguing - we're just more aware of what that kind of change takes.

I spent all of last school year trying to talk my principal into changing the way special education teachers teach, to do something that would be more effective.  I've been having the same discussion with her for 6 years.  Slowly... gradually... things have changed.  And as things have changed, we've actually seen more progress from our students, which opened the door for yet more change.  Now we've come up with a major change that we want to implement - team teaching, having two teachers in one classroom, instead of having each teacher in her own room - working together to reach a larger number of students at once... but it's a major change.  It affects curricular planning (because two teachers in the room at the same time, both teaching, changes how the lessons are presented); it affects scheduling (because you have to put the kids who truly _need_ the extra help in the classroom when both teachers are there, and it means the second teacher is not able to flexible with that class period, because the inclusion schedule is _set_); it's a major change for the non-special education teacher, who is not used to sharing her classroom (and there are several teachers who've refused to do it - which means, even if they were not given an option, that it wouldn't work well); there needs to be some kind of data collection - not just in the team teaching classroom, but in other, similar classrooms - to determine if it's actually working or not; and there are other considerations as well.  It's such a major change that, after putting it into the master schedule (which shows which teachers teach what subject which periods) the principal backed off of it - because she really does think it could work, but only if it's done right, and she doesn't want to "rush" into it.  Now, I've been working toward this for *6 years* - I haven't been "rushing" - and I've just been told that something that was supposed to start in August isn't starting until January.  And you sit there and tell me that I don't want change, and I'm "chewing you out" for suggesting alternatives.

There are good ideas in what you're suggesting - but you really have no idea just how complex the situation is, and what it would take to make the changes.



CuongNhuka said:


> But, here's the thing, every good idea, the ones that changed the world, almost all of them started with one person suggesting something to a group of people. Was that suggestion probably pretty bad? Yah, and so was mine. But, the debate that follows should be about figuring what is right and wrong with that suggestion, and using that debate as a framework to find an alternative that will work. And, if that isn't the purpose of such a debate, then I don't know what the point of a forum about politics and such is about.



Do you really think that discussing this on an internet forum is going to change anything?  You're welcome to bounce ideas off us - but at some point, you're going to have to _do_ something with them, in the sense of "put up or shut up" - or no one is going to really care what you think; they'll think you're all talk and no walk.  So go try and change something, as I said above, and then come back and tell us what did and didn't work, what you learned from it, and how you're going to do it differently next time.  But don't just throw out ideas based with no action behind them and expect that we'll all embrace them the way you do.



CuongNhuka said:


> Or, why someone would post a topic like what the OP did.



Well... the OP was MJS - you know, Mike, one of the people "attacking" your suggestions.  



CuongNhuka said:


> You guys aren't trying to figure out what parts of my suggestion (which I did come up with in just a few minutes) could be used. You're attacking my understanding of what a teacher does and my spelling.



If that's all you see... then nothing we say will make a difference.  And yes, people will attack your spelling - because all people see when they read your posts is what you write and how you write it.  There is no emotion in black and white letters on a screen, except that created by how people read what you write and the emoticons (if any) that you use to help people understand your emotional state.  So if you spell poorly, and your grammar is weak, then people who read your posts will react just as poorly as an interviewer does to a job candidate who shows up in dirty, ripped clothes, with unkempt hair and a half-eaten sandwich - because that's all we have to go by.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 2, 2008)

Shesulsa, I thank you.  This is a wonderful post, and there are a few points I'd like to answer.



shesulsa said:


> "Are schools not doing their job?"
> 
> That's a really hard question to answer.



It is indeed.  Much of the answer depends on what one considers the job of the schools to be.  At one point, the job of the schools was to teach "reading, writing, and 'rithmetic, taught to the tune of a hickory stick".  Those days are long gone... but the core commitment remains:  schools are institutions of education; their primary purpose is to pass on knowledge, and the skills with which to access and use knowledge, to the next generation.  The amount of knowledge available, and considered vital, has grown considerably over the last century, and the schools are drowning in the amount of knowledge available, trying desparately to determine which pieces are truly _vital_, and the best ways to pass those one - while being told from all directions that you must teach this, you mustn't teach that, this must be taught to this group, while this group gets this, etc., etc... all the while losing many of the pieces that keep students in school to the pieces that are considered "vital" by somebody who has the power to make it so.



shesulsa said:


> The argument for a mastery of language is an excellent one and mandated education in multiple languages can help that. Americans are, after all, one of the most poorly educated among industrialized nations when it comes to language, foreign language and mastery of literacy. Multilingualism will aid in proper grammar, spelling and syntax. A thorough education in language will underscore the learning in other subjects since our learning *is* largely language-based.



As I said previously in this thread - foreign language instruction should be begun much younger if it is to be truly effective.  However, on a global scale, French and Mandarin Chinese are more useful than Spanish (not that Spanish is not widespread - but for business purposes, French and Mandarin Chinese are the most widely disseminated).  But remember, too, when suggesting foreign languages, that first, the time to teach them must come from something else, and second, people in Europe are multi-lingual not just because they learn another language in school, but because the countries are smaller and closer together, so they are exposed to other languages much more often than many Americans.  There is a cultural difference that must be addressed - and the stereotypical "ugly American", who believes that everyone must learn English for his convenience, is, indeed, part of the problem.

Language is, indeed, at the core of much of our existence - it is what separates humanity from all other species (that we know of) on the planet, although there are questions about the complexity of some cetacean languages (whales and dolphins), and whether they actually rival the amount of information that can be passed in human languages.



shesulsa said:


> Standardized testing has a purpose and a place and it can work logically, but it cannot work thoroughly. There will always be children who cannot express mathematical processes with language but will be able to calculate like crazy. Students like this will consistently fail standardized math exams such as the WASL where spelling, grammar and punctuation in your explanation of process, calculation, reasoning and result must be perfect to score 2 points for a calculus problem, have no more than three errors total (calculation AND discussion) for one point.



Indeed...we have that same problem on the CSAP (the Colorado NCLB test) - students who can explain, in writing, what they did in a math problem can get more points for an incorrect answer than can students who get the answer right, but do not show their work.  At that point, it ceases to be a math test, and becomes a language test that uses math as the content to be written about... but the score is reported as the students' math abilities nonetheless.



shesulsa said:


> And we need to figure out what we think a school's "job" is or should be. Preparation for the real world would be a great thing, so how could that be achieved?



Somewhere, somehow, this needs to be done... and the role of the parent and the community needs to be included.  The schools do not exist in a vacuum; nor can they prepare students for the "real world" in a vacuum.



shesulsa said:


> Integrating an exploration of personal skill and pointing to a course of study would be helpful. Some high schools are incorporating the academy model, wherein the freshman year is about exploring likes, dislikes versus personality traits, analytical ability and talents. By sophomore year, they are pointed towards a committed collection of studies pointed at potential post-high school education and/or employment. Job shadowing, volunteerism and community outreach are among some required elements for culminating projects.



There are good and bad aspects to the above.  When I took a career survey in high school - one designed to highlight my strengths and weaknesses - it came out indeterminate; that is, it basically said I had the skills to do anything I was sufficiently interested in doing.  One of my friends took the same test at the same time, and it said that her best career choice was to enter trade school to become a skilled laborer (mechanic, plumber, etc) - she was the class valedictorian, and went on to graduate magna cum laude with a double degree in math and physics.  So while those can be good programs, if done well - too much reliance on standardized testing can backfire.



shesulsa said:


> As to the grading of effort, it should be an element in the grading process and I think there is something to be said for grading individual progress more heavily than the standard laundry list alone. Learning doesn't stop in high school, life will teach you or you will fail. That's the bottom line.



The day I stop learning is the day I die.  I learn something new every day - as should everyone.  And I learn the most from my students, both my TKD students and the middle school students to whom I teach reading and math.



shesulsa said:


> So in my opinion "fixing the problem" means identifying the problem first and frankly, there isn't only one problem and (exclusive of the Every Child Left Behind Act) it isn't the same problem across the U.S. Inner city school problems are different than the problems in the 'burbs.



And that is the piece of this law that I most object to - that it assumes that because the law mandates something, that it will happen, and that it will be right for everyone involved.   I'll leave this for now, with the following variation of NCLB, which has come to me in numerous emails:



> No Child Left Behind:  The Football Version
> 
> 
> Author Unknown*​        1. All teams must make the state playoffs, and all will win the championship.          If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until          they are the champions, and coaches will be held accountable.
> ...



There is also the Dentist version - which you can read here.


----------



## MJS (Jul 2, 2008)

CuongNhuka said:


> MJS, the problem isn't handing out a bunch of work, it's that (in the case I cited), the teacher didn't know the material. That is in no way, shape or form right. I would love to see someone tell me otherwise.


 
Did you read post 24?  Is it possible that there are a number of versions as to what happened?  I mean, if that could be the case, then how do we know what version is right and what is wrong?  Are any of them wrong or is it just another persons idea of what happened?



> Anyways. I've had a chance to sleep and think this whole thing over. Now, what occured to me (and this is just what I'm gathering from some of the other posts made) is that the people who are arguing against me seem to take the position that nothing is wrong with the system; or that there is something wrong with the system, but there is nothing that can be done to fix it. I (and a few other people) are taking the position that the system is broken, the horse is dead, lets find an alternative and move on. But, why am I the only one getting chewed out? Oh yah, I'm the only one suggesting an alternative.


 
As time goes on, things change.  Look at a classroom from the 1800s and I'd bet you'd see a massive difference today.  I actually gave you some positive comments with some of the suggestions that you made a page or so back.  Are schools short on cash?  Is the teaching material outdated?  Are the teachers not up to par?  Don't know, as I've been out for a long time now.  However, we have a teacher who is making posts in this thread, so I'm inclined to hold more weight with her comments, as she is seeing the ins and outs first hand.  I don't know every little thing a teacher does, and I'd bet that neither to the students.  

Keep in mind, as a few have said....I don't think that things should be spoon fed to kids.  Seems to me, reading some of the comments you've made about some kids that you know, that they just don't want to put any effort into anything.  Seems to me that they're pretty lazy, have no desire to learn, its not fun.....dude, people need to wake up and realize that there are many things in life that are not fun.  Life and work in the RW has its ups and downs, and it seems to me that some people think its an easy, free ride...it isn't.  



> But, here's the thing, every good idea, the ones that changed the world, almost all of them started with one person suggesting something to a group of people. Was that suggestion probably pretty bad? Yah, and so was mine. But, the debate that follows should be about figuring what is right and wrong with that suggestion, and using that debate as a framework to find an alternative that will work. And, if that isn't the purpose of such a debate, then I don't know what the point of a forum about politics and such is about. Or, why someone would post a topic like what the OP did. You guys aren't trying to figure out what parts of my suggestion (which I did come up with in just a few minutes) could be used. You're attacking my understanding of what a teacher does and my spelling.


 
Just for the record...the OP was me.   Keep in mind, that in life, there are people that don't want to take responsibility for their own actions.  If I walk quickly into a store, on a winter day, and see the sign that says "Caution! Wet Floor!" and keep walking quick, not taking that into consideration, that the floor is wet, and land on my rear end, whos fault is that?  Mine? The store?  Its my fault.  The store warned me, yet I still walked quick.  Yet people will blame the store?  Why? They didn't make me fall.  Getting back to school.  The school system does their part...teaching kids.  The kids and parents need to do their part and if it means getting tough on their kids, not letting them sit on their *** in front of the tv, instead of cramming the books, if the parents show no desire in their kids progress, if the parents don't get their kids help if they need it...who is to blame if their kids fail?  The school?  

School, both HS and college, IMHO, give you a foundation for life.  Its not going to hold your hand.  The kids still need to put in effort.  I'll use the Martial Arts again.  You have a system and people think that there may be a hole in it...it doesnt address certain things.  Is it really the system or is it the person, that doesnt understand the system?  Is the person not applying themselves fully?

You mention language.  I agree with that, but on the other hand, I live in the USA, where the primary language is English.  Why do I have to learn Spanish, because someone decides to come over here and refuses to learn English?  Hmmm...who lived where first?  Who is going where again?  I deal with people who don't speak English or broken English all the time.  Is it a help if I knew Spanish?  Sure, but why don't they learn English?  

I think that you're getting frustrated, because you're not really reading into what we're saying.  You're taking it for face value and thinking we're insulting.  Take the grammar and spelling.  If someone isn't spelling properly, how is that going to look in the real world?  The question people should be asking is why isn't the person spelling right?  Is the school failing them, or is the student not putting any effort into it?  If HS is supposed to prep you for the RW, how is it going to look on a job application if there are 10 mis-spelled words?  And this is a person that a company wants representing them?  

You know whats really sad....when you go into a store and buy something that, lets say comes to $11.48.  You hand the person a $20.  As the cashier starts to ring you out, the customer says, "Oh wait...I have .75.  The cashier stands there with a deer in the headlights look, because they can't figure out the change, because they already punched in $20 into the register, which does all the work for them!!!!  See, thats a problem right there.  With the fancy gadgets that do all the work, the person themself, doesnt have to do anything.  So now I stand there while this 17yo tries to figure out what to do next.  How about starting with teaching kids to think for themselves, the old fashion way, instead of having a machine do it for you.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 2, 2008)

Kacey said:


> You're not getting chewed out - you're being reasoned with, because those of us who are responding to you think you're worth responding to... but because we don't agree with everything you're saying, you think we're chewing you out. You might want to think about that for a minute... in the context of why the Study was closed for several days.
> 
> Does the system need repair? Of course it does - no one is disputing that. But the problem is deeper than you realize, and the solution is more complex than your alternative will cover. Where do the foreign language teachers come from? Who designs the new curriculum? When is it taught? What is replaced to make room for it?


  Great points.  Schools, especially public schools, today are required to do much, much more than simply educate and prepare students for college or work.  So much more that they can't do any of the jobs particularly well.  But there is no easy solution, either.


> I spent all of last school year trying to talk my principal into changing the way special education teachers teach, to do something that would be more effective. I've been having the same discussion with her for 6 years. Slowly... gradually... things have changed. And as things have changed, we've actually seen more progress from our students, which opened the door for yet more change. Now we've come up with a major change that we want to implement - team teaching, having two teachers in one classroom, instead of having each teacher in her own room - working together to reach a larger number of students at once... but it's a major change.


 
My mother was a special ed teacher for much of her career; it's interesting to me that what they were doing when she retired about 5 or 6 years ago is what you're striving to obtain.  It worked quite well, when the right teachers were paired up, and for the right students.  (Mainstreaming IS EMPHATICALLY NOT for every kid; if I hadn't been warned in advance, I would have put one kid through a wall.  ED+LD... joy, oh joy.)


----------



## Kacey (Jul 2, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> My mother was a special ed teacher for much of her career; it's interesting to me that what they were doing when she retired about 5 or 6 years ago is what you're striving to obtain.  It worked quite well, when the right teachers were paired up, and for the right students.


It's getting the right teachers paired up that's causing the most problem... I have one that I want to work with, who wants to work with me - but one of the other teachers approached in a different grade emphatically refused to do it.

Different schools come at the same solutions from different directions - when I was hired at my school 13 years ago, the student population was about 1000, and there were 7 special education teachers, 2 speech/language pathologists, a social worker, a psychologist, and 12 paraprofessionals (teachers' aides) for about 180 special education students.  Now, the school population is about 730, the special education population is about 110, and we have 4 special education teachers, 1 speech/language pathologist, a psychologist, and 5 paraprofessionals... and the school has gone from 5% bilingual to 30%, so we've seen a concomitant upswing in students who are in both bilingual and special education programs.  The change in our enrollment and population, along with the change in staffing, has been leading us to change how we provide services.  We teach a lot fewer pull-out classes than we used to; we don't have the staff for it - but with so many fewer paras around, we've been leery of limiting how many classrooms we can be in by committing to team teaching with the same teacher 1 period every day - it means that there are virtually no services available for students in other classes that period - because of those 5 paraprofessionals, 3 are in the severe needs program, 1 is in the Emotionally Disturbed program, leaving 1 to cover the entire rest of the school.  Next year is going to be interesting... and likely not in a good way, either.



jks9199 said:


> (Mainstreaming IS EMPHATICALLY NOT for every kid; if I hadn't been warned in advance, I would have put one kid through a wall.  ED+LD... joy, oh joy.)


Try having 3 of them (ED + LD) in the same room, in a class of 12, feeding off each other.  I did, all last year - and it could be worse; when that group was in 6th grade, there were 5 of them, but 2 of them moved over the summer.


----------



## MJS (Jul 7, 2008)

Came across this article today.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25378336/


----------



## Kacey (Jul 7, 2008)

Well, I will grant you that my teaching training program absolutely sucked when it came to actual curriculum - it was all about task analysis - but then, it was 15 years ago, and teachers I've talked to who have come up since say it's much better.  Also, like most teachers, I've taken quite a few supplementary courses, which have broadened my understanding of basic math, and thus my ability to teach it.  I think it's a system problem, certainly - teachers who were not taught the underpinnings of how math work teach other teachers the same way they were taught - but it looks like the times, they are a-changing... hopefully!


----------

