# Why is this public school being closed (maybe)?



## Carol (Mar 10, 2010)

I lived for quite awhile in the vicinity of Salem, Mass. and I just read a story from the Salem News that is making my blood boil.​ 
Salem is an old city with a lot of history. It home to a lot of young families, and is not a "rich town".​ 
One of the public elementary schools in the area is the Horace Mann Laboratory School, grades K through 5. 40% of the students are eligible for a free/discounted lunch. A significant percentage of the students are from a family that does not speak English as a first language. The school is housed in an old, outdated building. The school district's performance compared to the rest of the Commonwealth is below-average, and the district's performance on standardized tests is below-average.​ 
Looks, however, can be deceiving.​ 
This downtown school boasts a student-teacher ratio of 11 to 1. The school is located on the grounds of Salem State College, the largest State College...and the largest teacher's college, in Massachusetts. There are never any shortages of student teachers wanting to help teach, and the college appreciates having the school there as part of its community.​ 
The school's achievement tests are among the highest in the district, and are on par with an elementary school on the outskirts of town, in an area where familes have higher incomes and are less likely to speak a language other than English at home.​ 
Despite its success...it may be shut down.​ 
One of the issues is healthcare costs, and resistance from the teacher's union. Increasing copays from $5 to $15 was voted down by the union, which would have saved almost $1 million per year.​ 
The school board reports that closing the Horace Mann Laboratory school will save about $500,000 per year.

http://www.salemnews.com/punews/local_story_068235656.html


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 10, 2010)

Carol said:


> I lived for quite awhile in the vicinity of Salem, Mass. and I just read a story from the Salem News that is making my blood boil.​
> 
> Salem is an old city with a lot of history. It home to a lot of young families, and is not a "rich town".​
> One of the public elementary schools in the area is the Horace Mann Laboratory School, grades K through 5. 40% of the students are eligible for a free/discounted lunch. A significant percentage of the students are from a family that does not speak English as a first language. The school is housed in an old, outdated building. The school district's performance compared to the rest of the Commonwealth is below-average, and the district's performance on standardized tests is below-average.​
> ...


 
Because there is a large element of teachers that don't actually care about their students.  This is NOT an indictment of all teacher, mind you, just a segment.

And I count the UTLA (United Teachers of Los Angeles) among them.  They are the highest paid teachers in the country, the school has a 50% drop out rate, and yet they still whine that they are not paid enough.  The average teacher gets paid $62,000 a year, works only 9 months out of the year, and is next to impossible to fire.  

But God forbid, as this article states, that they have to pay an extra $10 in the CHANCE that they have to go to the doctors office to help dozens of children.  

Hell, as greedy as I am, even I wouldn't mind that.


----------



## ShelleyK (Mar 10, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> The average teacher gets paid $62,000 a year, works only 9 months out of the year, and is next to impossible to fire.
> 
> But God forbid, as this article states, that they have to pay an extra $10 in the CHANCE that they have to go to the doctors office to help dozens of children.
> 
> Hell, as greedy as I am, even I wouldn't mind that.




I have to say that you are sorely misinformed about how many months per year that teachers work!

99% of teachers work YEAR round including my husband!  In the off months you will find teachers preparing lesson plans for the next school year, buying school supplies with their own out of pocket money (because most times the school doesnt budget for extra things like folders and pencils for students that can not afford them) and getting a 2nd job to supplement the income that they are NOT receiving during summer months!  It is rare that a teacher will be able to afford a payment plan that will allot partial pay into a summer account so they can pay bills in summer, and the ones that ARE able to do this have usually been tenured for 20+ years and have a high enough income and probably a 2nd income froma spouse or other job to help supplemnt.  As it is, my husband has 4 jobs throughout the entire school year and summer just so we can barely make ends meet.  He is a music teacher and most of the time he has to pay out of pocket to buy music for students, or to repair a school borrowed instrument.  He also has to send out newsletters to new students every year, print out programs for several school concerts, chaperone after hours and on weekends for students that have competitions like all county and all state.  In spring he judges these competitions for extra income so I barely see him at all because he is traveling all over NY State on the weekends. Not to mention that all teachers are required to take classes throughout the school year and/or summer to keep current on teaching strategies, building lesson plans and SO much more.  Again this is another out of pocket expense just so that teacher whome everybody thinks gets paid too much has the ability to teach your child at the current  state levels required.  In summer he helps out with a few summer band programs...again for extra income as well as being a day camp counselor that pays only HALF of what he makes in a 2 month period during the school year.
I dont see any point in raising the cost of healthcare for teachers.  As it is my family pays between $5-$30+ for just for prescriptions and $15+ for dr visits.  This article didnt say anything about what it would cost those teachers a YEAR just for the health plan that was proposed to them.  For all you know that plan could have cut out certain kinds of dr visits or  something else.

Addressing the "next to impossible to fire" comment....WHY would you want to fire an established tenured teacher.  In the eyes of the school district and the school where they are teaching that teacher has proven his/her worth.  They have the credentials to fill the position.  The ONLY other reason that someone would want to be rid of a tenured teacher is to hire a younger less experienced teacher for a lower salary.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 10, 2010)

ShelleyK said:


> I have to say that you are sorely misinformed about how many months per year that teachers work!
> 
> 99% of teachers work YEAR round including my husband! In the off months you will find teachers preparing lesson plans for the next school year, buying school supplies with their own out of pocket money (because most times the school doesnt budget for extra things like folders and pencils for students that can not afford them) and getting a 2nd job to supplement the income that they are NOT receiving during summer months! It is rare that a teacher will be able to afford a payment plan that will allot partial pay into a summer account so they can pay bills in summer, and the ones that ARE able to do this have usually been tenured for 20+ years and have a high enough income and probably a 2nd income froma spouse or other job to help supplemnt. As it is, my husband has 4 jobs throughout the entire school year and summer just so we can barely make ends meet. He is a music teacher and most of the time he has to pay out of pocket to buy music for students, or to repair a school borrowed instrument. He also has to send out newsletters to new students every year, print out programs for several school concerts, chaperone after hours and on weekends for students that have competitions like all county and all state. In spring he judges these competitions for extra income so I barely see him at all because he is traveling all over NY State on the weekends. Not to mention that all teachers are required to take classes throughout the school year and/or summer to keep current on teaching strategies, building lesson plans and SO much more. Again this is another out of pocket expense just so that teacher whome everybody thinks gets paid too much has the ability to teach your child at the current state levels required. In summer he helps out with a few summer band programs...again for extra income as well as being a day camp counselor that pays only HALF of what he makes in a 2 month period during the school year.
> I dont see any point in raising the cost of healthcare for teachers. As it is my family pays between $5-$30+ for just for prescriptions and $15+ for dr visits. This article didnt say anything about what it would cost those teachers a YEAR just for the health plan that was proposed to them. For all you know that plan could have cut out certain kinds of dr visits or something else.
> ...


 
 You are not even close to correct with your numbers.. 99%... I would like to know where you pulled this one out of. Look I appreciate you are passionate about teachers, your husband, and his worth. But your passion is creating a warped view of the actual situation.
Public schools are crap in this country. I blame the administrations, supervisors, and all the extra crap that the schools should not be involved in. Schools should be involved in teaching, and teaching alone.
They need to get out of the food business.
They need to get out of the bussing business.
They need to get out of the psychology business.
They need to get out of the psychiatry business.
They need to get out of the Janitorial business.
They need to get out of the charity business.

They do not know what they are doing in those areas, and they are wasting billions of dollars nationwide on those corrupt, overpaid, and underdelivered areas.

Next teachers get tenured way to quick, and bad teachers are impossible to fire, I know several of them, my step father has been a teacher for 38 years now and he knows tons of them.
Stop trying to show developmentally disabled students in with the regular population when those students are creating huge  blockades to normal students learning progress... Look I understand that the shrinks and other docs of varying types are all saying its better for that kid to have him with normal kids, but you are handcuffing the teachers and that rest of the students by doing it. It is not fair, it is why private schools are growing by leaps and bounds, and why public schools are the worst of the worst.
Our schools cater to the worst, they should be set up to cater to the best and brightest. The majority of moneyt hat is spent in the actual class rooms goes to special ed and special needs kids by a large margin, this should be the opposite. Also teachers should never have tenure, they should always be up for a firing if they are bad at their jobs. Do not get defensive we are not talking about good teachers.... we are talking about obviously bad teachers.
The benefits for teachers is ridiculously good, way better then any public sector equivalent by leaps and bounds. Also teachers can choose their own lifestyle and what to do with their time off, the facts are they are working 9 months a year and not 12, and any more time they put in is of their own devices. If they are doing it they are doing it out of their own passions, and not becuase they have to. I have no problem with music being taught in our schools, but I feel that instruments and music should be paid for by the parents, and by the music industry, and by fundraising efforts of concerts, and similar ways. After all my kids will never do music in public schools... they are already starting on private lessons. I would much rather see our education dollars spent more effectively..
The biggest change I can see that could be done immediately is to see nationwide having textbooks become digital and have a digital read/book provided to all students that would much cheaper then even 1 regular text book runs, would cut down on paper usage, would be easy to update so that school districts do not have to waste billions of dollars on new textbooks every couple years, and so the students do not have to carry around huge backpacks... The money saved there would be able to buy new instruments for every school in the country. 
canceling school busing would save billions more, they need to hire private companies to contract it out.. the same with the cafeteria, and janitorial staffs..

Of course none of this will happen anytime soon because the politicians are to corrupt, and the general populace is to ignorant, and people like me would rather put our kids in good private schools then screw with it. I guess my only consolation to make myself feel better is that more people are going the private school route and hopefully the public school system will fail soon, and if not hey my kids are still going to need people to take their order at restaurants, and the other hundreds of low level unskilled jobs that the public schools are so good at forcing people to settle for.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 10, 2010)

ShelleyK said:


> I have to say that you are sorely misinformed about how many months per year that teachers work!
> 
> 99% of teachers work YEAR round including my husband!



I teach in Ontario, not in the US, so I can't verify the 99% figure up here or down your way. Certainly the young teachers I know at the start of their careers often take summer jobs to keep going. As for summer work to improve ones practice of teaching, the participation in summer courses here is quite astounding. I've taken eight courses myself since 2002, only three of which actually bumped my pay. The rest was purely motivated by a desire to be better at my job.

But I fear, Shelley, you've been pulled into the trap your husband is only too familiar with. It always starts with a serious discussion of education and ends up in bitterness over teachers not being in their schools for two months. I've been in education -- first adult and post-secondary, now elementary -- for more than twenty-five years. I stopped having dinner party conversations about my job because I know that little hammer is going to drop.



> I dont see any point in raising the cost of healthcare for teachers.  As it is my family pays between $5-$30+ for just for prescriptions and $15+ for dr visits.  This article didnt say anything about what it would cost those teachers a YEAR just for the health plan that was proposed to them.  For all you know that plan could have cut out certain kinds of dr visits or  something else.



I can't comment on the insurance co-pays, living up here with universal commie-care, but Jeeze Louise, why the Hell aren't Americans standing up and applauding anybody who will stand up to big insurance and say, "Blow it out your nose. I work hard for my benefits, and I'm not going to be nickeled and dimed."



> Addressing the "next to impossible to fire" comment....WHY would you want to fire an established tenured teacher.  In the eyes of the school district and the school where they are teaching that teacher has proven his/her worth.  They have the credentials to fill the position.  The ONLY other reason that someone would want to be rid of a tenured teacher is to hire a younger less experienced teacher for a lower salary.



Indeed. This is what it always comes down to. What good is a worker you can't fire? Your last argument is golden. 

I've read a great deal about education funding and governance in the USA and with all due respect to my neighbours to the south, what I see is absolutely shocking. The conditions particularly in inner-city school districts and and the appalling salaries paid to teachers who work there is purely a recipe for failure. I was astonished to watch a program on PBS several years back in which a panel of high ranking education officials discussed the following question: "Your college age son or daughter has decided to enter the teaching profession. What would you say?" 

Honest to God, you would think they had just been asked:  "Your college age son or daughter has decided to become a professional bowler without ever having bowled and plans to underwrite the cost of that career move by dealing crack on the side. What would you say?" Every panelist spoke of low pay, poor security, long hours, low satisfaction and on and on. It was the saddest thing I ever heard.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 10, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> They need to get out of the food business.
> They need to get out of the bussing business.
> They need to get out of the psychology business.
> They need to get out of the psychiatry business.
> ...



I would be somewhat inclined to agree, but I don't see anybody stepping up to do it or pay for it. Not sure what you mean by janitorial business: schools require a lot of maintenance and cleaning. There simply is no mechanism -- at least none anyone's prepared to pay for -- to repair children outside the school and make them ready for learning.

While I can't speak to the specifics of this school jurisdiction, I've worked a lot in the inner-city with both children and adults. I've taught refugees, people absolutely scarred by the experiences that brought from their home country to mine. It ain't pretty. Throw in gangs, inter-generational welfare and low literacy, lack of job readiness. Walking into a classroom and prevailing today is far more than a matter of knowing the best way to teach reading.

I'm not an apologist for all teachers. Not everyone that gets into the profession is a saint. People who take the job only for the money (which I think is quite good where I work) or the summer off find themselves sorely disappointed and sometimes bitter. Those folks don't advance. The lucky ones realize their mistake and get out. The ones who remain I don't particularly envy. I cannot imagine doing the job I do ten months of the year without feeling some sense of pride and satisfaction. It simply is not worth it.


----------



## ShelleyK (Mar 10, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> Public schools are crap in this country.



Im only going to grace this ONE comment you made with an answer.

You want to know why public schools are crap...I will give you several reasons in no particular order...

1) The money that is given to public schools by the government has to be shared with charter schools which to me is a crock of S*** because if you create a charter school then the parents and educators that are a part of that school should be paying for it not the families of the public school system.

2) Parents do not set prime examples of discipline and self control therefore their kids run wild in the schools, swearing at teachers, bullying other kids AND teachers, defacing school property, and stealing, among other things.

3) There is no room for discipline from teachers anymore.  I am a firm believer in that it takes a community to raise the children that are IN and a part of the community, so if the educators are not allowed to discipline or even give praise by patting a kid on the back for that matter then how is that kid supposed to show respect for their elders and educators?

4) Taking away certain kinds of classes in the schools.  Its a proven fact that children that are involved in music and art classes score higher on tests and have less of a chance of flunking out or dropping out of school.  It doesnt matter if that child takes music in school or private lessons kids should be exposed to the arts and develop a respect for them.  It doesnt matter that little johhny or little Jane cant play the instrument well or sing well or cant draw a stick figure, its the fact that they are exposed to it and MAY develop  a liking for it which in turn just MIGHT flourish.

5) Parents putting the blame on teachers all the time...Johnny didnt do his homework because he didnt understand it...well guess what Johnny probably didnt raise his hand to ask the teacher for extra help either (personal experience with my own kids...so yes I DO know what Im talking about) So what do the parents do...they blame the teacher, saying the teacher isnt teaching correctly or is picking on Johnny.

6) Overcrowding the schools.  The government keeps closing down schools to save money, therefore putting more burden on the remaining schools, overcrowding classrooms, which makes it harder for the teachers to give extra help...so what does the teacher do?  She stays after school on her OWN time to make sure she is there for the students that need extra help...again personal experience in ALL the schools my kids have gone to so far...from elementary up through high school now.

There is a lot more that I can go into..Yes I am passionate about the welfare of teachers, about my husband too.  But I dont let that cloud my judgement when it comes to defending them


----------



## David43515 (Mar 10, 2010)

I teach for a living (High School and Jr High) but I do it in Japan, so obviously there are some parts of the system I`m not familiar with. But I always hear friends who teach in the States complain about having to take a second job in the summer, and it irks me that they think they shouldn`t have to work year round like everyone else.  The teachers`s unions in the US are much too powerful and seem to expect much higher levels of benefits than anyone with a similar education gets in the private sector. As far as their not wanting to raise thier insurance co-pay, I think it sounds like the same spoiled sense of entitlement you get from most large unions. These people need to remember they`re public employees and are subject to budget cuts like everyone else.

         I`ve seen tenured teachers in the US and here in Japan who were incompetant, lazy, and in some cases crimminally dangerous. And more often than not they are simply moved around rather than fired like any normal company would do to them. Years ago we made big stinks about the dangers of pedophile preists, but statistics show kids are abused by teachers much more often. There are plenty or reasons to fire tenured teachers that have nothing to do with economics.

As far as cutting the cost of janitorial services at the school, here in Japan most schools have a single custodian who is mostly responsible for maintaining the grounds and running heavy machinery. *ALL* cleaning is done by students. They spend about 15 minutes a day doing jobs that are assigned to thier homeroom class on a rotating basis. It`s fast, cheap and teaches kids responsability , teamwork, and gives them a little pride in thier school. And I personally think it helps keep the students from dividing into cliques as much. (It`s hard to be the coolest elite in the school when you`re the guy scrubbing toilets this week.)

Schools that really want to lower thier budgets can simply add 2 more classes to the end of the day and goto a 4 day week. That automatically cuts food, and transportation costs by 20% across the board. It may also cut utility costs depending on locations.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 10, 2010)

ShelleyK said:


> Im only going to grace this ONE comment you made with an answer.
> 
> You want to know why public schools are crap...I will give you several reasons in no particular order...
> 
> ...


 
*It absolutely seems to be clouding your judgement, like I said before my stepfather has been a teacher for 38 years, he is retiring next year and most likely is going to go teach in a private school, the public schools and the districts, and the institution itself is a pile of garbage.*

*I also never stated that all teachers were bad, or that some were not even incredible. Your husband may or may not fall into either category, that is not my argument here. My argument is the system sucks, its wasteful to the extreme, its outdated, its bloated and corrupt, and it needs to change.*

*BTW I have been having a conversation with a soldiers wife on another forum as well, you and her remind me of each others comments.. both want more pay for what they consider underpaid, overworked, and underappreciated professions... Like I told her where is the money going to come from, and who is going to be the driving force behind the change?*


----------



## David43515 (Mar 11, 2010)

I for one would love to see teachers required to renew thier teaching credentials every few years by taking proficiency tests in the subjects they`re teaching. Most states require students to pass a 9th grade profifiency test to graduate high school. (If I remember correctly) A few years ago it was given to several teachers and more than 40% failed it.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 11, 2010)

David43515 said:


> I for one would love to see teachers required to renew thier teaching credentials every few years by taking proficiency tests in the subjects they`re teaching. Most states require students to pass a 9th grade profifiency test to graduate high school. (If I remember correctly) A few years ago it was given to several teachers and more than 40% failed it.



I don't necessarily disagree, but I have a couple of thoughts:

In jurisdictions where teaching is a licensed profession, why is it assumed that teachers will forget what they know, but they same assumption is not made of doctors, nurses, lawyers, accountants, police officers. Many of these occupations may require a renewal of licensing through fees. In the case of health care, professionals may required to upgrade their CPR. And then of course some professional colleges may call upon their members to upgrade, but not to retest.

Teachers' assignments change. In desperate circumstances teachers are instructed to teach subjects they are not schooled in. So what do you test them on? Their 'teachables' (courses they trained to teach) or their assignment?


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 11, 2010)

David43515 said:


> As far as cutting the cost of janitorial services at the school, here in Japan most schools have a single custodian who is mostly responsible for maintaining the grounds and running heavy machinery. *ALL* cleaning is done by students. They spend about 15 minutes a day doing jobs that are assigned to thier homeroom class on a rotating basis. It`s fast, cheap and teaches kids responsability , teamwork, and gives them a little pride in thier school. And I personally think it helps keep the students from dividing into cliques as much. (It`s hard to be the coolest elite in the school when you`re the guy scrubbing toilets this week.)
> 
> Schools that really want to lower thier budgets can simply add 2 more classes to the end of the day and goto a 4 day week. That automatically cuts food, and transportation costs by 20% across the board. It may also cut utility costs depending on locations.


 
I would vote for both of those to happen.
There are many ways to spend money more efficiently in the school system. Holding people accountable, including people, and improving things.

My desire would be to see how efficiently we can reduce all the non education positions associated with the school systems, take all that money that is saved and give a portion back to taxpayers in the form of less taxes, a portion towards improving and updating schools, and a portion towards teacher raises... and only teacher raises... but only if it is done based on merit, like most every other profession in the nation.

Reduce teh waste in schools, then we can work on the same in the prison system, local, state, and federal governments, and we have a great start.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 11, 2010)

David43515 said:


> I for one would love to see teachers required to renew thier teaching credentials every few years by taking proficiency tests in the subjects they`re teaching. Most states require students to pass a 9th grade profifiency test to graduate high school. (If I remember correctly) A few years ago it was given to several teachers and more than 40% failed it.



David, in posting previously on my opposition to the selective retesting of teachers -- even where it does not apply to other professionals -- I neglected to address your comments about basic skills. I agree they should be non-negotiable for a teacher.

The thing is that the teacher candidate should have mastered these before entering teachers' college, and that opens a larger issue. What I'm getting at is that if a person holds a high school diploma, that should carry an expectation that the individual can read proficiently and produce basic written work that is readable and free of distracting mechanical errors.

The college or university diploma should exceed those high school expectations.

What is the reality? As I'm sure you're aware, undergraduate schools are funneling students through over-crowded lecture theatres and cutting costs on tutorials by multiple choice testing rather than grading essays and essay responses in examinations. When I was teaching English in the community college system, I was the lone miserable soul who was collecting written work for one semester while virtually everything else students produced was fed through a Scantron machine.

By the way, my marking load in the college system was about fourteen-hundred assignments per semester, somewhere shy of three-thousand for the entire school year. You want teach people to write and think -- you make them write and think. Then you mark until your eyes bleed.

Nowadays, I believe a lot of students are punching in their multiple choice tests on computers, so that work doesn't even have to be graded by the prof's own hands. I know of one professor, not that many years ago, who was chastised for commenting too much on style and usage when reading papers.

I went to teachers' college at York University in 2000, some twenty years after undergraduate school. A preponderance of my assignments were in the form of group work presented orally. The explanation for this was the need for teachers to collaborate. The reality, IMO, was that our profs would not have managed the pace of marking without TAs. It was just plain cheaper, and I knew it. A couple of times, the teachers in my school placements commented on the superior quality of my unit plans and other writings -- I'm no genius; they were just well-written.

So the point of my analysis is that if teachers are falling short on basic skills, they're probably in good company.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 15, 2010)

Firstly, I don't care that teachers have the summer off.  I believe in a free market economy (of which public schools are not actually a part of) and believe that if it is a benefit of the job, then so be it.  I get enough vacation time to satisfy me that I don't need to be jealous of anyone else's.

You may talk about the abysmal state of salaries in teaching, and as I showed, for 9 months of work in the LAUSD, the average teacher makes a salary of $62,000 a year.  Not exactly abysmal.

And I abhore tenure in schools lower then the college / university level.  The primary point of tenure is to give teachers: 



> the right to academic freedom: it protects teachers and researchers when they dissent from prevailing opinion, openly disagree with authorities of any sort, or spend time on unfashionable topics. Thus academic tenure is similar to the lifetime tenure that protects some judges from external pressure. Without job security, the scholarly community as a whole might favor "safe" lines of inquiry. The intent of tenure is to allow original ideas to be more likely to arise, by giving scholars the intellectual autonomy to investigate the problems and solutions about which they are most passionate, and to report their honest conclusions.
> 
> Source: Wikipedia


 
I am curious as to what research high school and elementary teachers are conducting that they need to be protected.  Meanwhile, we in L.A. at least, we get teachers who commit crimes and are merely moved about.  We get substandard teachers who are impossible to fire, not because their salary is to high, but because they are useless.  

Quite frankly, if you believe that the only reason to fire an "established, tenured teacher" is to save costs, then you are sorely mistaken.

As to some specific points made:



> 1) The money that is given to public schools by the government has to be shared with charter schools which to me is a crock of S*** because if you create a charter school then the parents and educators that are a part of that school should be paying for it not the families of the public school system.


 
Um, sorry, but they are paying for it.  It's called taxes.  Everyone pays them, even people without school age children. 

But what I find completely ironic is that you would want those people to pay for their charter school, but you would also probably mandate that they still pay for public schools as well.  How is that in anyway fair?



> 2) Parents do not set prime examples of discipline and self control therefore their kids run wild in the schools, swearing at teachers, bullying other kids AND teachers, defacing school property, and stealing, among other things.


 
I would argue that most parents do the best that they know how.  It's funny that you will victimize the teachers, but absolutely lambast parents in order to protect those teachers, not admitting that there is enough blame to go around on both sides.



> 3) There is no room for discipline from teachers anymore. I am a firm believer in that it takes a community to raise the children that are IN and a part of the community, so if the educators are not allowed to discipline or even give praise by patting a kid on the back for that matter then how is that kid supposed to show respect for their elders and educators?


 
No it doesn't.  It takes parents to raise a child.  My teachers did not raise me, my family did.  My teachers provided me with an education.  That is all they should be required to do.  If, in order to maintain order within the classroom, they must impose discipline, then so be it.  But this is entirely different from them "raising" my child.



> 6) Overcrowding the schools. The government keeps closing down schools to save money, therefore putting more burden on the remaining schools, overcrowding classrooms, which makes it harder for the teachers to give extra help...so what does the teacher do? She stays after school on her OWN time to make sure she is there for the students that need extra help...again personal experience in ALL the schools my kids have gone to so far...from elementary up through high school now.


 
Overcrowding is caused by different reasons.  In L.A., it is the importation of massive amounts of illegal immigrants without a commesurate increase in the tax base, resulting in insufficient infrastructure.

And SOME teachers stay over.  I couldn't say what percentage of teachers do, but I would venture to guess that the number would be geographically specific. 

But what is also ironic, is that you complain about charter schools, but then complain about overcrowding due to schools being closed.  These are incompatible positions.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

It's going to take me a while to come up with an intelligent response to this thread.  Suffice to say, I agree with a lot of the criticisms.  I also agree with the points that various teachers are making.  Here's what I can say after running a mentorship/apprentice program at a school and attempting to place students according to their interests.  What you pay teachers to teach these subjects, real professionals will double the costs.


----------



## Carol (Mar 15, 2010)

Double the cost? To me that sounds doubtful. 

The median rent in Salem, MA is about $700, median home price $188K, and the median salary is about $35K, or so says SimplyHired.com. The starting salary in the Salem Public schools is $50K, from what I hear from my friends that are in the know. 

I don't know many careers that will offer someone fresh of Salem State College a job that pays $50,000 per year.  I don't think these numbers are off the mark. That is enough to live in the city of Salem, or live outside of the city, and have enough capital for a decent apartment, a new car, and still have a fair amount of disposable income.

I think the Salem teachers deserve an honorable pay for what they do, but I don't think they are doing something that outside industry would pay six figures a year to do (not to mention the hidden costs of benefits, etc), nor do I think that teacher pay is so low that teachers must take a second job or work through the summer just to make ends meet.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

Carol said:


> Double the cost? To me that sounds doubtful.
> 
> The median rent in Salem, MA is about $700, median home price $188K, and the median salary is about $35K, or so says SimplyHired.com. The starting salary in the Salem Public schools is $50K, from what I hear from my friends that are in the know.
> 
> ...



Starting salary is 50K?  Are you sure about that?  I knew MA teachers got paid well, but I didn't know that it was THAT high?  Out here in HI where the cost of living is through the roof, with a BS, you can expect to get paid about 33K starting.  In other states, starting goes from 20 to 30 K.  

With that in mind, if you want to bring in an Engineer to teach basic engineering classes or physics or if you want to bring in a computer specialist to teach any classes, you are going to have to easily double the starting salary in order to make that happen.  For some professions, I could see that rising to six figures if you were to pay for 12 months of actual work.  

When we pay our mentors, we have to offer a market rate.  They are taking time out of their day to work with students and that's not cheap.  Carol, imagine what you or your company would want as compensation to work with a student for half a day once a week for 12 weeks?


----------



## Carol (Mar 15, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> Starting salary is 50K? Are you sure about that? I knew MA teachers got paid well, but I didn't know that it was THAT high? Out here in HI where the cost of living is through the roof, with a BS, you can expect to get paid about 33K starting. In other states, starting goes from 20 to 30 K.


 
That is what I have heard from a longtime friend that works in the Education department at Salem State College, after discussing a few scenarios involving my niece (currently on active duty). Can I swear to its accuracy? No, but when I have gone to him for input in the past, what he has offered has been spot-on, so I don't have any glaring reason to think his input is out of bounds.

The state-published average teacher salary for the Salem public schools for FY 2009 is over 63K, which is online at the Commonwealth's Dept. of Education website (mass.edu).





> With that in mind, if you want to bring in an Engineer to teach basic engineering classes or physics or if you want to bring in a computer specialist to teach any classes, you are going to have to easily double the starting salary in order to make that happen. For some professions, I could see that rising to six figures if you were to pay for 12 months of actual work.


 
Easily double? I don't buy it. I think you can easily find a scientist or an engineer to teach a job with 3 months off in the summer for under $125K.



> When we pay our mentors, we have to offer a market rate. They are taking time out of their day to work with students and that's not cheap. Carol, imagine what you or your company would want as compensation to work with a student for half a day once a week for 12 weeks?


 
OK, I'm imagining it. There are many of us in professional or technical fields that look for side work or side projects that can at least partially utilize our skill set.

Half of a school day is 2.5-3 hours. The average Salem teacher makes the equivalent of about $40/hour (63K dollars per year x 1500 hours/year). Hell, I'd commute to Salem for that kind of gig, and I'm over an hour away. So...$100 or more for 2-3 hours work, once a week, for 3 months? Sign me up.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

Carol said:


> That is what I have heard from a longtime friend that works in the Education department at Salem State College, after discussing a few scenarios involving my niece (currently on active duty). Can I swear to its accuracy? No, but when I have gone to him for input in the past, what he has offered has been spot-on, so I don't have any glaring reason to think his input is out of bounds.
> 
> The state-published average teacher salary for the Salem public schools for FY 2009 is over 63K, which is online at the Commonwealth's Dept. of Education website (mass.edu).






Carol said:


> Easily double? I don't buy it. I think you can easily find a scientist or an engineer to teach a job with 3 months off in the summer for under $125K.



I imagine I probably could.  Even if we halved 125K, that is still more then most teachers actually make.  Speaking for myself, with my science background, I know that I could make double what I make in the private sector. 



Carol said:


> OK, I'm imagining it. There are many of us in professional or technical fields that look for side work or side projects that can at least partially utilize our skill set.
> 
> Half of a school day is 2.5-3 hours. The average Salem teacher makes the equivalent of about $40/hour (63K dollars per year x 1500 hours/year). Hell, I'd commute to Salem for that kind of gig, and I'm over an hour away. So...$100 or more for 2-3 hours work, once a week, for 3 months? Sign me up.



The going rate is about $70 to $120 dollars a day depending on the mentor.  We have a veterinary mentorship that is really expensive, but she works great with kids and really inspires them, so it's worth it.  IMO, this is where secondary education is heading, so I don't think you'll have to wait that long for one of these contracts. 

Anyway, I think this points out how poorly we pay our teachers as a nation (maybe not in MA  ).  I don't know what the fix is or even if it's possible to fix the problem without scrapping the system and starting over.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 15, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> I imagine I probably could. Even if we halved 125K, that is still more then most teachers actually make. Speaking for myself, with my science background, I know that I could make double what I make in the private sector.
> 
> Anyway, I think this points out how poorly we pay our teachers as a nation (maybe not in MA  ). I don't know what the fix is or even if it's possible to fix the problem without scrapping the system and starting over.


 
See here is part of the rub for me on this whole thing.
If you can go get more then go get more, there are tradeoffs, you will not have three months off in the private sector, you will not have the quality health and retirement benefits that teachers have now, and you will have alot more stress to perform to keep your job. If you want more money then you have two options, either go get it in the private sector, or figure a way to get in teaching... I will absolutely not pay any more taxes, nor will the majority of Americans for the failure that our education institution has become. To be quite honest, I absolutely believe that K-12 are teaching jobs that do not require a ton of experience to do professionally, and competantly. It sems to me to pretty much be an entry level position out of college, is there really some exremely high level of skill needed to teach K-12? There simply is not a higher evolving skill level needed to justify huge increases in salary and benefits that I can see. I am all for scraping the entire system and redoing it completely, our school system is outdated, wasteful, and not teaching the skillsets that are needed in todays rapidly progressing world. Our public school systems are designed for getting a kid ready for life in the 1950s....


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> See here is part of the rub for me on this whole thing.
> If you can go get more then go get more, there are tradeoffs, you will not have three months off in the private sector, you will not have the quality health and retirement benefits that teachers have now, and you will have alot more stress to perform to keep your job. If you want more money then you have two options, either go get it in the private sector, or figure a way to get in teaching... I will absolutely not pay any more taxes, nor will the majority of Americans for the failure that our education institution has become. To be quite honest, I absolutely believe that K-12 are teaching jobs that do not require a ton of experience to do professionally, and competantly. It sems to me to pretty much be an entry level position out of college, is there really some exremely high level of skill needed to teach K-12? There simply is not a higher evolving skill level needed to justify huge increases in salary and benefits that I can see. I am all for scraping the entire system and redoing it completely, our school system is outdated, wasteful, and not teaching the skillsets that are needed in todays rapidly progressing world. Our public school systems are designed for getting a kid ready for life in the 1950s....



I agree with a lot of what you are saying.  With canned curriculum and standardized programs, you can basically turn teachers into factory workers or the equivalent of McDonalds employees.  It's not good teaching though.  Kids don't learn well that way, but that seems to be the direction we are heading.

In general, good teaching is a highly skilled profession that requires advance training and continual education.  Especially if you want to include technology into the picture.  When you get into secondary school, each subject is taught by a specialist in the subject and in education.

The other thing is that you shouldn't have to pay one cent more for education then we already are spending.  Between the federal, state, and local government, we are spending upwards of 20K on each student.  We should have WAY more for our money then what we are getting.  I completely understand people's frustration and share it.  Teacher's could run a school, pay themselves well, and educate children well with a different system.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 15, 2010)

And what about the fact that private school teachers generally make much less money then public school teacher, but churn out a better product.

Now, I understand that our educational system consists of more then teachers, and that they do have little control over the system itself.  I am sympathetic to the concerns of teacher *when it comes to the teaching system.*

That being said, I am beginning to find that most public school teachers are becoming whiners when the drop out rates are through the roof and half the kids can't even read.


----------



## Carol (Mar 15, 2010)

True, although private school teachers have some resources public schools don't have (ie: more academic freedom), they also have a better crop of students to work with.  That is not something to be discounted.

For a parent to be able to afford private school tuition, chances are the family has some decent stability (from a social perpsective).  The parents have an understanding of what it takes to be successful because they have done it themselves.  In addition....when you have a parents that are willing to pay thousands of dollars per year, per child, they are going to be extremely involved in that child's education.  

My sister lives in a school district (not in New England) that has had a lot of problems, and is in a county that is among the worst in her state for social issues.  My older niece and nephew were homeschooled through grade 8, and went to the town's public high school through grades 9-12.  The complaints they had about the high school was the overall lack of effort from their fellow students, leading to disruption, the pace of the classes slowing down, etc.

My younger niece and nephews (my sis adopted a sibling unit of 4) are currently in a charter school a half hour away.  The charter school is not a glamorous place.  It is basically a vacant lot with a slew of trailers set up as temporary classrooms.  They have a fundraising night once a month to help raise funds for the school, which is tuition-free.

Here, there are students from families that may not be as well off, as educated, or as succesful as the students in private schools.  However, the support from the parents is phenomenal.  I attended one of their fundraisers.  They sell pizza for 3 dollars a slice, and the school is set up like an open house...you can visit all of the classrooms, meet the teachers, see some of the student's work.   It was jammed!   Kids everywhere, parents everywhere.  

I don't think the public school system should be scrapped.  At the same time, teachers are dealing with a lot of problems that stem from social fabric issues...and that's before the administrative matters step in.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> And what about the fact that private school teachers generally make much less money then public school teacher, but churn out a better product.
> 
> Now, I understand that our educational system consists of more then teachers, and that they do have little control over the system itself.  I am sympathetic to the concerns of teacher *when it comes to the teaching system.*
> 
> That being said, I am beginning to find that most public school teachers are becoming whiners when the drop out rates are through the roof and half the kids can't even read.



Carol brings up some good points about the nature of families who send their kids to private school.  Regarding the teacher salary issue, I've got something to add.  In no way does the education system set teacher pay according to the market.  It's all managed from the top down with private school compensation hitched to what is offered in public institution.  

This happens because parents who send their kids to private school pay tuition on top of what they already pay in taxes.  If parents were allowed to move their kids and their money to schools of their choosing, we'd see market forces return and good teachers at good schools would be very well compensated.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2010)

Carol said:


> I don't think the public school system should be scrapped.  At the same time, teachers are dealing with a lot of problems that stem from social fabric issues...and that's before the administrative matters step in.



I don't think it should be scrapped either.  I believe in public education and I have no problem with taxes such a system.  I think what we need to do is restructure what we think schools should do and how we think about schools.  That will lead to the desired increases in quality.  

Schools cannot solve every social problem.  One school cannot serve every type of learner.  And schools cannot force a student to learn.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 16, 2010)

I think we should throw out public education entirely. All it does is teach our children how to be drones.

My $9,000 a year (and rising) property taxes could be spent on a much higher quality of education in a private school.  And I would have choice and some say in what and how my children are being taught.


----------



## Carol (Mar 16, 2010)

I hear what you're saying about rising property taxes.  I don't think the answer is scrapping the public school system entirely.   The public schools continue to provide services that non-traditional schools may not be able to provide well.  This isn't just for kids that are from troubled homes, it is also for kids who have parents that did everything right, and still have trouble.

When my older niece and nephew were being homeschooled, the public schools provided tutoring assistance and the opportunities to be involved in sports.  My niece had some medical issues as a baby which resulted in her having some developmental issues....particuarly as a younger child.  My sister, even being a social worker, was not equipped to handle such a thing, so my niece was able to get the extra help she needed at the town school.  We nearly had to take similar action for my niece and youngest nephew, who have an IEP for speech.  Close to home, a friend of mine from school has a son who is the same age as one of my nephews (young teen), with significant mental health issues.  His parents have the means to send him to a private school, but are keeping him in the public schools in their city (it's not Boston, but it is one of the larger cities in Mass.) because they are far better equipped to handle a child with his challenges than the charter or private schools are. 

I think the answer is going to be what Maunakumu touches on...and that is revamping the schools so they are more designed to fit the student's needs.  

I already see some of this happening where my sister is.   The schools in the county, and the neighboring county, are taking on more of a regional approach to education, and this is resulting in more opportunities for the kids.  My new nieces and nephews have two options that were not fully available to the older ones. 

When my oldest nephew was in high school, he was able to take some AP courses for college credit at the local community college.  That concept has grown in to a new high school being built (organizationally speaking) at the college.   Incoming freshmen go to school for 5 years instead of 4, but when they finish, they have an Associates Degree, and it is all tuition free.  The community college in question has a 2+2 arrangement with a few of the local universities.  If the student does well, they are nearly guaranteed admission at the University of (their state), as well as a the State University, and a few other local universities of significance.

Another school in the area is a technical high school that was founded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  Rather than teaching kids metal shop and woodworking, the focus is on technology...learning IP routing, system administration, database management, programming.  

I think a better answer may lie along these lines, with schools taking on more of a regional focus (esp. high schools) and developing in to institutions that can better mat a student's performance, needs, and interests.  For the younger grades, I don't know what the answer is...but the school I mentioned in the original post, with its small class size and steady stream of student-teachers looks like they are doing something right.

Sorry for the ramble, this is an area that I'm a wee bit passionate about


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 16, 2010)

Carol said:


> I hear what you're saying about rising property taxes. I don't think the answer is scrapping the public school system entirely. The public schools continue to provide services that non-traditional schools may not be able to provide well. This isn't just for kids that are from troubled homes, it is also for kids who have parents that did everything right, and still have trouble.


 
I have to respectfully disagree.  I would argue that it is not the fact that non-public schools *can't* do it.  In my opinion, private schools could do just a good of a job in such situations as a public school.  In fact, private schools tend to be better at most things then public schools, they just don't have the funding.  If we got rid of public schools, most people would have the disposable cash to pay for those extra services.  

And, as callous as it may seem to say this, it is not the public at large's responsibility to "police" the homes of every child.  We might as well just come out and call ourselves the facists that we would be then. 






> Another school in the area is a technical high school that was founded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. Rather than teaching kids metal shop and woodworking, the focus is on technology...learning IP routing, system administration, database management, programming.


 
And this is as it should be.  But this was a donation by a private individual, not the payment forced by government which we all have to endure.



> I think a better answer may lie along these lines, with schools taking on more of a regional focus (esp. high schools) and developing in to institutions that can better mat a student's performance, needs, and interests. For the younger grades, I don't know what the answer is...but the school I mentioned in the original post, with its small class size and steady stream of student-teachers looks like they are doing something right.


 
The problem is that this is becoming more and more impossible.  Everytime I hear the federal and state governments talking about "improving" education, I cringe.  There is nothing that the government does efficiently except blow things up and put out fires, and sometimes I question even that.  No-Child Left Behind is a perfect example.  We are continually taking the power over education *out* of the hands of parents and educators, and using the issue as a political football to score points.  

And it will only get worse. 
Sorry for the ramble, this is an area that I'm a wee bit passionate about [/quote]


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 16, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> If we got rid of public schools, most people would have the disposable cash to pay for those extra services.



Looking at all of the 2nd world countries that either have no public school system or a crappy one and great private schools, I can tell you that there is going to be a large segment of people who can't afford to go to school or can't afford to go to a good school.  Maybe you are okay with that, but I'm not.  

I believe that we should try and give all of our children the opportunity to receive the best education we can possibly give them.  This is just as important as "blowing things up or putting out fires".  Our society must have an educated public or it won't function in the fashion that our Founding Fathers intended.

That said, I think there is a lot of room to let a free market for education flourish in order to better serve a diverse population of learners.  If you don't think it's the governments responsibility to provide education, fine, it could be done through various local coops.  But even there, you'll be dealing with massive inequities.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 17, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> Looking at all of the 2nd world countries that either have no public school system or a crappy one and great private schools, I can tell you that there is going to be a large segment of people who can't afford to go to school or can't afford to go to a good school. Maybe you are okay with that, but I'm not.
> 
> I believe that we should try and give all of our children the opportunity to receive the best education we can possibly give them. This is just as important as "blowing things up or putting out fires". Our society must have an educated public or it won't function in the fashion that our Founding Fathers intended.
> 
> That said, I think there is a lot of room to let a free market for education flourish in order to better serve a diverse population of learners. If you don't think it's the governments responsibility to provide education, fine, it could be done through various local coops. But even there, you'll be dealing with massive inequities.


 
Who are these proverbial "our children"?  I have two children, and they are the ones that I am primarily concerned with.  

And the more I research the documents written by some of our Founding Fathers, the more I am beginning to believe that the state of affairs that we are in is exactly what they intended.  We do not have a public "education" system.  We have a public "indoctrination" system.  Our children are not being educated to be free-thinking adults.  They are being taught exactly what to think about any number of things, none of which is about educating them.

In any case, our public "education" systems are failing these kids.  According to a USA Today article, fourteen urban school districts have graduation rates lower then 50%, including Detroit, Baltimore, New York, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Los Angeles, Miami, Dallas, Denver and Houston.  In Los Angeles, in fact, the graduation rate is just 44%.    In that same school district, the dropout rate is 34%.  Baltimore and New York City have graduation rates of less then 39%.

If we could get local control of small, parent directed school districts, then maybe I could get behind it.  But as it stands now, what we have is untenable.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 17, 2010)

Ironically, I just received this news article today from a friend of mine.  Amazing that you don't hear anything about it on the news:




> * Charter  school in tough neighborhood gets all its seniors into college *
> 
> Urban  Prep Academy senior Keith Greer, along with his classmates,  celebrates the news they will receive a free prom in Chicago because  100 percent of the graduating class was accepted into 4-year  colleges or universities. (Tribune photo by Heather Charles / March  5, 2010)
> 
> ...


 
Why don't we like charter schools again?


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 17, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Who are these proverbial "our children"?  I have two children, and they are the ones that I am primarily concerned with.



You, my friend, are a child of America.  My father and my grandfather's sacrifice helped to protect you, feed you, and educate you.  As adults it's easy to get myopic about these things and just focus one what we think we can produce with our own two hands.  The truth is that all along the way, you were helped and guided by society and your parents and this partnership helped you become a productive citizen.

We can do a better job of this, certainly.  We can give people more freedom and more responsibility to choose for themselves.  We can let people fail when they make bad decisions.  We can make learning available if people wish it so they can learn from their mistakes.  

Some people see public education as just another handout, but I see it as the ultimate hand up.  Education can only open a door, it can't force you through.  Some people think you can use education to make people into something they desire, but they've been proven wrong again and again.  It's a big waste of time and huge waste of money and it's one of the reasons our system is failing so miserably.  

People don't want to be indoctrinated.  They don't want to be forced to learn things.  They want choice and freedom and support and we can have it all.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 17, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> You, my friend, are a child of America. My father and my grandfather's sacrifice helped to protect you, feed you, and educate you. As adults it's easy to get myopic about these things and just focus one what we think we can produce with our own two hands. The truth is that all along the way, you were helped and guided by society and your parents and this partnership helped you become a productive citizen.


 
I was not helped by "society".  I was helped by individuals.  You can argue that people a thousand miles away had an impact on my life.  Fair enough.  But then again, so do / did the Chinese, Japanese, Germans.  Heck, my mother's side of the family is from England, so they helped me too, going back generations.  

What's the point.




> We can do a better job of this, certainly. We can give people more freedom and more responsibility to choose for themselves. We can let people fail when they make bad decisions. We can make learning available if people wish it so they can learn from their mistakes.


 
But none of this has anything to do with "education".  Teaching about spelling, math, science, etc., has nothing to do with giving people more freedom.  Hell, in fact, forcing parents to make their children go to schools is the antithesis of giving people freedom.  But we have truancy laws.  

But, we have to protect kids from their parents now, don't we.  We have to tell them how to raise their children.  And that's exactly what we are doing with public education.



> Some people see public education as just another handout, but I see it as the ultimate hand up. Education can only open a door, it can't force you through. Some people think you can use education to make people into something they desire, but they've been proven wrong again and again. It's a big waste of time and huge waste of money and it's one of the reasons our system is failing so miserably.


 
It depends on what you desire to make them.  Our system of public "education" was designed to make drones, and it is doing an excellent job of it.   If our public system actually educated, then MAYBE I might agree with you.



> People don't want to be indoctrinated. They don't want to be forced to learn things. They want choice and freedom and support and we can have it all.


 
They may not want it, but they aren't doing a damn thing to stop it.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 17, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> I was not helped by "society".  I was helped by individuals.  You can argue that people a thousand miles away had an impact on my life.  Fair enough.  But then again, so do / did the Chinese, Japanese, Germans.  Heck, my mother's side of the family is from England, so they helped me too, going back generations.
> 
> What's the point.


 
 I read an academic paper the other day that showed how every child needs at least six influential adults in order to be successful.  These are the individuals that most of us point to in our lives when it comes to how we were raised.

What we forget about are the other multitudes who contributed in other ways.  In America we tend to remember the soldiers who fought on our behalf, but we forget the policemen, the doctors, the teachers, the scientists, the farmers...and the taxpayers.  They all contribute directly to your success and this is who I mean when I say society.

You don't need to go back to your ancestors, but I suppose you could if you want to.  The farther you go back, the lesser the contribution.

I fully realize that we have some major problems, but that doesn't change the fact that we have an interlocking grid of people supporting each an every individual in various ways.  Even in America, this is the simple truth.

Some societies do this better then others.



5-0 Kenpo said:


> But none of this has anything to do with "education".  Teaching about spelling, math, science, etc., has nothing to do with giving people more freedom.  Hell, in fact, forcing parents to make their children go to schools is the antithesis of giving people freedom.  But we have truancy laws.



Yes, I agree.  Forcing people to go to school is part of the problem.  We need to have choices and compelling reasons to educate ourselves.  Then we need to make sure we provide them.



5-0 Kenpo said:


> But, we have to protect kids from their parents now, don't we.  We have to tell them how to raise their children.  And that's exactly what we are doing with public education.


 
Yes, and it is wrong.  It's a waste of money and it doesn't work.  We need to let people fail and provide them with the opportunity to choose success.  Public education could be a part of this.



5-0 Kenpo said:


> It depends on what you desire to make them.  Our system of public "education" was designed to make drones, and it is doing an excellent job of it.   If our public system actually educated, then MAYBE I might agree with you.


 
Yes, and I can even show you who planned it that way and how they went about doing it.  What we know of as public education is a massive social engineering project that is failing for a variety of reasons.  I would rather put the onus of learning on the individual and let them decide what they want to be for themselves.  I see myself, as a teacher, providing a service that someone wants, not something that someone needs.  That's a major paradigm shift that I'd like to see implemented across society.



5-0 Kenpo said:


> They may not want it, but they aren't doing a damn thing to stop it.



I disagree with you here.  We have schools with all kinds of active and passive rebellion insipid in everything they do.  We have dropouts and kids who hardly learn a thing telling us every moment of every day that what we are doing is not wanted.  *The system fails because people reject it.*  Something will rise to take it's place.  That's what we really need to pay attention to.  

What do we want?


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 17, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> I disagree with you here. We have schools with all kinds of active and passive rebellion insipid in everything they do. We have dropouts and kids who hardly learn a thing telling us every moment of every day that what we are doing is not wanted. *The system fails because people reject it.* Something will rise to take it's place. That's what we really need to pay attention to.
> 
> What do we want?


 
I don't think it's truly rebellion.  At least, not the kind that you think it is.

What I am seeing is rebellion against earlier generations.  A break from parentage and tradition.  But I believe this is exactly what the powers that be want.  

In order to control us, they must first cut our ties with those people and institutions that our people have traditionally trusted.  That means our parents, teachers, cops, etc.  They must create continual crises and a vacuum so that people will begin to look to others for solutions that they deem are out of control.  They must make civilization "out of control".  

Then they will step in and "fix" it.  And that means that they will control the response.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 17, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> I don't think it's truly rebellion.  At least, not the kind that you think it is.
> 
> What I am seeing is rebellion against earlier generations.  A break from parentage and tradition.  But I believe this is exactly what the powers that be want.
> 
> ...



I think the people in control may think that, but when you actually talk to kids, well, that's a different story.  The rebellion against our school system is alive and real and massive.  Even in well to do communities, it is scorned.  Even among kids who do well enough or are high achievers it is disliked.

What we need people to do is wake up and realize, like you have, that it was all created on purpose, with all of its warts and other terrible things, in order to achieve certain goals.

John D. Rockefeller wrote the following in order to guide his massive Foundation as it shaped our current school system.



> In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions [intellectual and character education] fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have ample supply. The task we set before ourselves is very simple...we will organize children...and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.


----------



## Carol (Mar 17, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Ironically, I just received this news article today from a friend of mine. Amazing that you don't hear anything about it on the news:
> 
> *
> 
> Why don't we like charter schools again?*


*

That's a great story.  My sister is in a predominantly black county so that hits home quite hard.  I don't think the charter school where my niece and nephew are attending are making many headlines either.  Believe me, I'm not against charter schools at all.*


----------



## Carol (Mar 17, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> I have to respectfully disagree. I would argue that it is not the fact that non-public schools *can't* do it. In my opinion, private schools could do just a good of a job in such situations as a public school. In fact, private schools tend to be better at most things then public schools, they just don't have the funding. If we got rid of public schools, most people would have the disposable cash to pay for those extra services.


 
OK, that is a fair point. 



> And, as callous as it may seem to say this, it is not the public at large's responsibility to "police" the homes of every child. We might as well just come out and call ourselves the facists that we would be then.


 
I hope I didn't come across as stating that we need to police the homes. I didn't mean that...what I did mean is that there are many kids that come from troubled homes, and yet it still becomes incumbent upon the schools to educate them. I'm not sure if it is effective, or even fair, for a child that is intelligent and really wants to learn to be in the same (say) science class as a child that is preoccupied with his own issues and more intent on distracting the class. However, a more decentralized approach may spawn an environment that is more effective at teaching that kind of environment.



> And this is as it should be. But this was a donation by a private individual, not the payment forced by government which we all have to endure.


 
Certainly so...I'm just putting this forward as an example of a specialization that is in place right at this moment. 



> The problem is that this is becoming more and more impossible. Everytime I hear the federal and state governments talking about "improving" education, I cringe. There is nothing that the government does efficiently except blow things up and put out fires, and sometimes I question even that. No-Child Left Behind is a perfect example. We are continually taking the power over education *out* of the hands of parents and educators, and using the issue as a political football to score points.
> 
> And it will only get worse.


 
Which...is why I brought up the topic to begin with. Here you have a school district where the average teacher makes $62K per year, that will not make the concession to go from a $5/visit medical copay to a $15/visit medical copay....which will save the city over a million dollars per year. 

As a result, the city is threatening to close one of its better schools that has been more effective at educating some of the city's disadvantaged kids than the other schools in the district. Its a bloody power play. 

My concern about getting rid of private schools entirely...I am concerned that this would lead to fewer children being educated due to educational access. I am also concerned that the end result would be fewer dollars for edcuation because the people that do not have school age children would not be providing adding any monies to the system.

Well..I don't have kids and...heck, even though I don't own property, if the city drastically cut property taxes, rents would start falling. That's good for me. Socioeconomically speaking, my neighborhood is average at best. There are a few professionals, like myself, there are also working class families, many of whom do not have a solid command of English and work...a lot...to support their families. It is not uncommon at all to see a parent that supports their family by going without a car, or sharing one car between a few relatives, and working two jobs. Its also not uncommon to see the kids with a better command of English than the parents. I know these kids are in public schools, I see them get off the bus sometimes as I leave for work. I haven't yet seen a child in the neighborhood that seems to have a noticeable behaviour issues, so I'm going to guess the kids overall are not horrible students. 

If my apartment were a condo, I'd probably be paying about $3000/year in property tax, maybe a bit more. Now, lets say $2000 of that goes towards education. Well, my downstairs neighbor has the same size apartment I do, but he has two school-age boys. And he does not have a car. So is giving him a check for $2000 truly enough to cover an education and the costs of getting to school?

Is the education he gets going to be decent enough if they don't have folks like me (childless) or my neighbor sam (older chap with grown children) getting a tax rebate instead of those dollars going towards an education? 

Believe me, I'm all for smaller government, lower taxes, and power jockeying within the schools, but I think it would be very bad for my city, or even my safety and way of life, if a reasonable education system became even more accessible than it is.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Mar 19, 2010)

Carol said:


> OK, that is a fair point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I guess, to bottom line my position on the subject, is a few things:

1:  I don't think that it is appropriate to force me to pay money for children other than my own.  Even if I were to agree that it is ok, I would still argue that it should go towards those schools in my geographical district, so that I could maybe see some benefit, ie., lower crime, better business opportunities, etc.

2.  The very fact that the public school system is used by politicians as a political football, therefore, the desires of the parent take second fiddle to their desires.  And it will always be so.

3.  The federal intrusion into an area of state soveriegnty by way of threats to education funding if the stated don't comply.

4.  The fact that there is, and probably never will be, any accountability within the public school system.


----------

