Public Education

[Makalakumu]

I teach at an alternative school for "at-risk" youth. These kids are "at-risk" of not graduating, "at-risk" of going to jail, "at-risk" of drug addiction ect...bottom line, martial arts come in handy at my school. Not to smack anyone around - its the confidence part.

Here is my point, my students are students that teachers have continually kicked out of their classes for behavior issues so we have class sizes between 6-12. We use field activities, service learning, and vocational community involvement to hook them into learning.

I still see behaviors, but they are greatly diminished and I am able to deal with each of them when they happen. Also, the education my students get is individualized to the learner's learning style. Basically, I am taking students who have a 0% chance of success in school and increasing their chances by over half. We don't save all of them because there are some really bad problems we just can't fix.

Just imagine. What if all schools were like this? If we could raise the success bar for everyone by half would you see any acheivement gap? How would we compare to other countries?

Beware, I'm going to get on the stump. :soapbox:

Unfunded mandates and increased standardized testing is not going to make public education better. Only smaller schools, small class sizes and more teachers is going to make a difference. My school is direct evidence of this. We need to stop beating around the "Bush" and look at the issue that no body wants to deal with. Schools are not factories and our kids are not products.

 

[MisterMike]

If children are our future, why do we not invest in them? I wouldn't point at the top (Bush) but a lot of people do because it's easier to point once, especially if it isn't at ourselves.

But every state is is charge of every state school. And if the lawmakers of those states will not put up the money to ensure every kid has a book and the teachers are paid what they deserve, there's a lot more pointing to be deserved.

But the same lawmakers will vote themselves pay raises, and create 100's of additional program$ that do not go to our kids. Every year. If your local representative is not voting for better schools, and for all the other CRAP, you need to let them know.

 

[Makalakumu]

Mike

I do let them know. I have been involved. Our state has some of the best schools in the nation, yet the could be better. They could be better everywhere. The No Child Left Behind legislation has good intentions, but it lack in the resources for implementation. This could have been a good bill with the financial backing to change things, yet we spend our money on all of these things that are not as important as our children. I would say that this bill is deliberately left unfunded. When our schools can't perform. It'll be vouchers - which in itself are not so terrible - but on the whole, unequal. The choice provided by vouchers is not available to people the private schools will not accept. It all starts with education. If access to it is limited, that citizen is forever limited.

upnorth

 

[MisterMike]

Kyosa,

I saluteyou for being vocal in your community. I think more people should get on thehorn and call their reps and let them know how they feel. Flood the lines if you have to. We should tell them that our kids do matter and if they do not support budgets that foster growth in our schools, they won't be there next term.

I think the states DO have enough money to fund their own schools, without the help of Federal money. If they would sit down and divy it up right. :asian:

 

[qizmoduis]

Originally posted by MisterMike
If children are our future, why do we not invest in them? I wouldn't point at the top (Bush) but a lot of people do because it's easier to point once, especially if it isn't at ourselves.

Because an uneducated population is easier to manipulate and control. In a representative democracy like ours, votes can be turned by cheap displays of religious fervor and fake emotional appeals rather than logical arguments and presentation of facts. That's how we end up with complete dimwits like Bush and his lackies in charge.

The folks in charge know very well that the children are our future, cliched as that sounds. That last thing they want is for those children to be able to make informed decisions as adults.

 

[Makalakumu]

Don't make the mistake of thinking that bush and his cronies are dimwits. They are very smart and very capable of pulling off their plans.

 

[qizmoduis]

Originally posted by upnorthkyosa
Don't make the mistake of thinking that bush and his cronies are dimwits. They are very smart and very capable of pulling off their plans.

I understand your point. It's difficult to reconcile this with their antics, however.

 

[Makalakumu]

There antics seem stupid and irrational because their goal is the destruction of the New Deal. Why would anyone want to do that? Why would anyone set a bar that poor schools can't reach? They have an agenda and they are ruthless in their pursuit of that agenda.

 

[Cruentus]

Assuming the topic is regarding education and smaller class sizes, I will give my opinion as someone who worked in the schools for 5 years, as an aid in special ed, to a perminant sub in General ed., to a perminant position at an alternative center High School.

First off, Class sizes shouldn't ever exceed 25 students at a high school level...but unfortunatily they often do.

They don't all need to be 6-12 students either.

The fact is different kids have different needs, and different kids have different learning styles and environments that they are comfortable with. Most High School kids can function well in a classroom of 20 or so kids. Some would even prefer this number because there are certian activities you can do with a larger group that can't be done with smaller groups.

However, there is always the minority who have a difficult time functioning in a class with 20 or so kids. This could be for various different reasons; trouble in personal lives enabling them to concentrate, disabilities, or being far removed socially from their peers (like if they have to work 40 hours a week at 16 because they come from a disadvantaged family, when most of their peers do not have jobs at all). We still need to facilitate the needs of these students who have special needs, rather then taking on a "shape up or ship out" attitude. These kids need a smaller class size of 6-12 kids, with more personal attention and taylored solutions to fit their needs. Some of these kids can't succeed in a larger classroom, and they need a different environment. If we can't facilitate these needs, then we are failing these kids.

In the district I worked with, "The Alternative Center" was a great solution. Most of the general public of students went to the regular schools. Some of the kids who had trouble succeeding there could get the attention they need in a smaller school (80-90 students from grades 9-12, 6-14 kids in a classroom). With the same curiculum as the general high schools, these kids showed both quantitative and qualitative results. Better attendance, better behavior, and better grades.

Many of these students who I worked with that were "Jail Bound" according to guidance counclers and teachers now have good jobs, are in college, and are productive members of society after going through the alternative center.

So...If done correctly, I think Alternative centers are a good answer.

However...we need to make sure on a Federal, State, and Local level, that we fund our education system properly so we can have alternative centers, no more then 25 students in a general classroom (and thats pushing it...the average should be 20), etc.

If we don't use our tax $$ to fund education now, we'll only be putting more of our tax $$ into our prison systems later.

PAUL