What Are The Real Issues with Education?

[MineralMan]

In reading discussions about why far too many kids are not getting a decent education, it seems like several issues are part of the discussion, and all of these issues have adherents:

For some, it's a labor issue, with the needs of the teachers as the highest priority.
For some, it's an issue of whether charter and private schools should be part of the mix.
For some, it's blamed on public schools altogether and the suggestion is that they be abolished.
For some, it's a political issue, all tied into other political issues.
For some, it's a taxation issue, and I've seen people claim that schools should be paid for ONLY by parents.
For some, it's a money issue, with some wanting to cut spending and others wanting large increases in spending.
For some, it's a social issue, with arguments about whether it's parenting, poverty, race, or some other social factor that makes the difference.

For a very few, it's a moral issue. It's an issue of kids being failed by our current system. It seems like these people are willing to try things to make it work, even knowing that some of the experiments will fail. But, the fact is that the current system is failing badly for far too many children.

I guess I fall into that last group, since it is focused on the children who are being failed, rather than anything else. That's the first priority, in my opinion, with all the others secondary, at best, and some of them not even worthy of consideration.

Please see my signature line, if you're angry at me right now. Then comment as you please.

[JackRiddler]

1. Okay, it's a moral issue.

And then?

[MineralMan]

3. And then we try different approaches in different areas and learn

from which ones work and which do not. That's been going on for some time, actually. We've already learned some stuff. Some of it is inconvenient, though, for those who hold certain views.

[JackRiddler]

5. Yes, apply the learned lessons.

Lesson 1: Charter schools as a whole do not produce better schools than public schools as a whole.

Lesson 2: Those charter schools that are better on the whole than public schools (like in Harlem) tend to have much higher budgets than public schools. Money matters.

Lesson 3: Class size matters. Hire more teachers.

Lesson 4: Things other than math and science scores matter. Good meals, music and arts, sports, humanities. This means money. No money, no solutions.

Lesson 5: All teachers in Finland (praised in "Waiting for Superman" as the model to follow) are unionized and paid well.

Who is it that doesn't like these lessons?

[ladjf]

8. Good points. nt

[MineralMan]

9. You Wrote:

"Lesson 1: Charter schools as a whole do not produce better schools than public schools as a whole.

Lesson 2: Those charter schools that are better on the whole than public schools (like in Harlem) tend to have much higher budgets than public schools. Money matters.

Lesson 3: Class size matters. Hire more teachers.

Lesson 4: Things other than math and science scores matter. Good meals, music and arts, sports, humanities. This means money. No money, no solutions.

Lesson 5: All teachers in Finland (praised in "Waiting for Superman" as the model to follow) are unionized and paid well."

My Response:

1. That's not universally true. Some charter schools are, indeed, producing better results. We need to find out why that is.
2. Actually, budget does not seem to be the primary issue. In the Twin Cities, some of the best-performing charter schools have the poorest budget and struggle to stay afloat, while doing a great job of educating. It's a puzzle, isn't it?
3. Class size does matter. That seems clear. Hiring more GOOD teachers seems like a great idea, but doesn't appeal to the folks who put money concerns at the top of their list of issues. School levies are failing in many places with horribly understaffed schools.
4. Yes, schools must educate across the board. Again, you'll find difficulty with the people who don't want to fund anything at all. It's a problem that must be solved. In Minneapolis, the public school with the very highest amount spent per student is one of the worst schools in the city. It's closing soon, because parents refuse to send their children there. Money isn't everything.
5. Good teachers should be very well paid. Poor teachers should find other employment. Finland is on the right track, no doubt.

[Luminous Animal]

27. Specifics please.

1) What are the names of the best-performing charter schools with the poorest budgets?
2) What public school with the very highest amount spent per student is one of the worst schools in the city?

[Hannah Bell]

47. most charter schools do the same or worse than the schools they replace. only 17%

do better.

the reasons they do are the ones jack riddler listed, plus: they can kick out students who are disruptive, low-scoring, or expensive.

what don't you understand?

please stop trying to pretend there's some big fucking mystery here.

we've always known how to improve schools; the knowledge exists, the will on the part of the monied ruling class doesn't.

[MineralMan]

52. I don't doubt that you are correct. Still, we need to look closely at

the ones that do better, as well as the public schools that excel. We can also look at private schools. What works, works. I don't care where the source of funding comes from. I'm interested in results and results alone.

Things must improve. How that happens is the question. I'm not interested in anything but results, whatever their source.

Are you an educator? I'm not, although I have taught at the college level. If you are an educator, then please share your reasons for success. If you are not, then, you're in the same boat I am. No better or worse. We're both looking at the system from outside the system. I don't believe that anyone who is not doing education as a career has any expertise to offer. I only have questions.

[Hannah Bell]

73. jesus christ. we've been looking at the same thing for 100 years.

we already know what works.

what works is a relatively equal society. period, end of story.

where there's inequality, there's mass pathology. period, end of story.

i'm so tired of this disingenuous bullshit: "oh, it's so very, very complex, we must study it more..."

education deform is the cover for further destruction of the working class. period, end of story.

[MineralMan]

76. I don't think that Jesus Christ has anything to do with this.

If there were such an entity, then why has it not done something about the inequity you describe. Personally, I don't believe in such things, but many people do.

Some of them even want to abolish public schools altogether. What's that about?

Thank you for participating in my thread. Your screen name is familiar.

[Hannah Bell]

79. so is yours. i associate it with disingenuous posts about education &

diversions about swear words.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

87. "plus: they can kick out students who are disruptive, low-scoring, or expensive."

EDIT: ^I took that from HB

If I want my penny jar to be 100% pennies, I'll kick out the nickels and dimes.

Seriously, this is a big one that mysteriously never comes to light. You're right on there, Hannah Bell.
:thumbsup:

[XemaSab]

42. I don't think you can understand math or science

without art.

Or at least, art gives you a whole new window of understanding for math and science, and vice versa.

[SharonAnn]

132. Poverty, (food, shelter, child care) and inadequate parenting,

[leftstreet]

2. unRec

[MineralMan]

4. Thank you for taking the time to read my post.

Unrecs don't matter. Recs don't matter. The discussion matters. I'd welcome your actual comments.

[leftstreet]

60. No prob. What made you think people would be angry at you for posting this?

:popcorn:

[MineralMan]

75. Just a feeling. And, reading the thread, I see that some were

angry. Others, not so much.

[rocktivity]

6. It's a political issue tied into corporate personhood.

America no longer needs a well-educated workforce because corporate fascism has so depleted the number of jobs and good wages that are available.

Blue-collar jobs can be exported; white-collar jobs can be done by the children of the rich. That leaves a middle class whose upward mobility must be annihilated by union busting, wage depression, erosion of civil rights, and fear-mongering divisiveness. The most recent example of this is New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg naming a magazine publisher with no educational background as the new public school chancellor. Her mission: to prove that a public school system is unworkable by insuring that it's unworkable.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[MineralMan]

14. Ah, I see I left that out of the list.

Corporatism. Yes, many people think that's the problem. We can add that to the discussion. Personally, I don't believe that is the problem.

[sabrina 1]

90. Since the current system of education, No Child Left Behind,

was written by businessmen, with little or no input from actual educators, I would say that Corporatism if a big part of the problem.

As a teacher (private school) who has chosen a different career now, I can assure you that that program is one of the worst examples of an educational system possibly in the history of education.

However, huge profits have been made by Educational Publishers due to the demand for their outdated test materials. Billions in profits, but not much progress as far as education over the past ten years since it went into effect. If anything, scores have gone down against those of other countries. None of which is surprising to anyone who has the first clue about how children learn.

Children do not learn by testing. Until that notion goes, there will be little improvement in the overall education of American children children.

I could go into detail, but I realize that those involved in the system of education in this country are not really interested in 'education'. I am and am very proud to say that while I was teaching, I produced students who were actually educated, not one of my elementary students ever had a problem with reading, eg. And we did not test them until the third grade. We educated them.

But, seeing the writing on the wall as to what was happening with education, I along with many other excellent teachers across the country, decided to find other careers. I would not contribute to what amounts to child abuse, by forcing children who, for various reasons should not be put through the stress of facing constant testing until they are ready, simply to satisfy the business world by producing numbers and check marks they think tells them something about the children who are subjected to their methods.

Teachers can go find other careers, but the students are the ones who suffer when adults with zero experience or training in this profession, decide that they know what is good for them.

After ten years of little or not progress with this system, it boggles the mind as to why it was not only NOT abolished, but enhanced by the current administration.

[jpgray]

7. The efforts, expectations, and examples of peers and relatives

Along with your social class, the above determines your commitment to school more than anything else. You can survive untold numbers of bad teachers if the above are in your favor, and you get little benefit from good teachers if not. Better is always better, but it will not make a substantial difference unless kids feel pressure and see positive examples in their lives, from peers and from parents.

Let me ask you--how many adult relatives did you have who were unemployed? How many of your peers thought school was a fucking waste of time with no relation to your future life? How many friends did you have in jail? Were your parents together? Did they have free time? Were they addicts? If everyone around you thinks "fuck this, it's got nothing to do with me," it's pretty difficult to buck that pressure, both for you and for your teacher--whatever the abilities of the two. If everyone around you thinks "better study, do well, go to college--or you're worthless," that's something else again. You could drop Eton on one group and the worst school in the country on the other, and I bet the changes wouldn't be as drastic as one would expect.

[Klukie]

10. [phone]

[MineralMan]

12. This is not about me. I got a great education back in the 1950s and 1960s.

The reason for that was for many of the reasons you mention. Now is not then.

I have no doubt that what you say is true. So, how do we deal with that situation? That's the question, isn't it?

[Klukie]

19. I don't think we will deal with the situation...

I think the situation will deal with us eventually. We will continue to regress as a nation until we become hungry enough to value thought again.

[jpgray]

23. That was the general "you"--not accusing the specific "you" of anything. :-)

The specific problem as I see it is that whole swaths of the population are unnecessary to the economy. Completely unnecessary. Take a look at the fastest growing jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics:



My grandfather's graduating class was six people. Yet all his buddies did well despite dropping out--the vast majority owned homes, land, raised kids, retired early, etc. My grandmother had only a high school education, but rose to a management position at her bank from entry-level (one of the first women in the state to do so). Who was the last bank manager you met without a college degree? Yet I never met an MBA half as sharp as my granny. :D

The final irony is that their schooling was lousy. One crowded room with all levels together, and a teacher -vastly- under-qualified by today's standards: no study in child psychology, no education in esoteric pedagogy, no technocratic curriculum or evaluations, no massive administrative system of shuffling superintendents. It was a different world then not necessarily because the education system was better, but because many more people were necessary to the economy, and the barriers to entry and stability were substantially lower. Despite the fact that a college degree was in many cases completely unnecessary for jobs in which lacking one would be unthinkable today, and far fewer people pursued them, the middle class grew solidly.

We need good remunerative jobs that provide dignity and a living wage for all who desire them and can fulfill their duties. Without that, it's hard for many kids to see any point whatever to passing classes or graduating from high school, let alone going into hock for nursing school or a college degree. The barriers are so high today that even -law school- makes little sense unless you get into the Ivy League. The market is so lousy and the debt level is so massive that even top tier grads are despairing.

In essence: make the unnecessary people feel necessary again. If you do, there is no barrier they won't surmount on the way to success. Seriously.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. + a gazillion

[BzaDem]

43. That assumes that poverty causes educational failure. But doesn't such failure help cause poverty?

Rather than just writing off people who have relatives and peers with poor "efforts, expectations, and examples," as you mentioned, shouldn't we be trying to find a system that helps those people, so fewer people in the future will have such circumstances?

How can these circumstances be improved WITHOUT improvements in education? Assuming we can improve these peoples' circumstances to improve education seems to be looking at it backwards.

[Hannah Bell]

48. "we" & "these people" lol. who is this enlightened "we" that's going to do for "these people,"

keemosabe?

reducing inequality improves educational outcomes. if you gave it some thought, you might understand how.

[BzaDem]

49. "reducing inequality improves educational outcomes"

Doesn't improving educational outcomes reduce inequality? Doesn't variance in education contribute significantly to inequality?

[Hannah Bell]

53. you can't figure it out? because income inequality produces ghettoes, both material & psychological.

& all the "amelioration" & condescending charity in the world can't tear them down.

fuck your "we" & "they".

[BzaDem]

54. Of course it does. But don't poor educational outcomes contribute to inequality in the first place?

[Hannah Bell]

55. no. inequality isn't a function of "education". it's gotten worse as americans became more

highly educated.

[BzaDem]

57. That's crap.

When some Americans get more highly educated, and others continue to receive horrible educations, that increases inequality. I don't think very many researchers disagree with this (though of course to you, as always, everyone else is wrong, as opposed to you being wrong).

[Hannah Bell]

59. the inequality is structural. even if everyone received EXACTLY the same education,

nothing would change so long as the distribution of wealth & the organization of production stayed the same.

It's about CLASS POWER, not education.

Your assertion that education is the problem (the typical middle-class view) is crap. Most of the jobs that have been created in the US over the past 20 years require the ability to read & write & get up on time & little more. We have 10% unemployment & it's not because americans didn't get enough education; the jobs that are gone went to peasants in China & Mexico who can barely read & write. and those jobs left because capital wanted a bigger cut of the surplus, period.

[BzaDem]

64. Again, I'm not disputing that you are SAYING that -- I'm disputing its accuracy.

It isn't just the typical "middle class" view -- it is the considered view of researchers who have studied the question. The distribution of wealth would ITSELF change if educational opportunity were equalized.

You are holding the distribution of wealth constant in your analysis, and that is bullshit. Of course there would continue to be inequality if educational opportunities were equalized, but inequality would be reduced.

[Hannah Bell]

69. no, the distribution of wealth WOULD NOT CHANGE unless the balance of power changed.

it's gotten worse over the past 40 years despite HUGE leaps in the percentage of children educated and the amount of education they got -- & objective measures of that increase.

It *is* the typical middle class view, & *not* the opinion of "researchers" as a class.

[XemaSab]

116. It's not people with a masters in art history from UCLA voting for Inhofe and Palin

Americans may have more years in school, but they're certainly not more educated than they used to be.

I think education has been intentionally dumbed down so that people in power don't have to deal with things like unions and other expressions of socialism at the bottom.

[de novo]

121. You have the causal relationship backwards.

Inequality produces the poor educational outcomes.

It is a negative feedback loop, also know as a compounding disadvantage.

[BzaDem]

123. I don't think I have it backwards. You acknowledging that it is a "negative feedback loop" confirms

my position.

Both cause the other.

My point is that it is silly to assume that nothing can be done to improve educational outcomes, when improving educational outcomes is a huge contributor to equality (not withstanding the BS some other people have stated).

[Danger Mouse]

11. It's a moral issue. And there are no easy answers.

[MineralMan]

13. That's certainly true. I certainly don't have the answers.

I maintain, however, that nobody seems to, even those who speak with the loudest voices. A lot of people seem to think there must be an easy answer, and the list I wrote is what many believe - Usually just one of those items, though.

[Danger Mouse]

24. I have some suggestions.

Fully fund education. Stop overemphasizing standardized tests as a measure of academic achievement. Stop pressuring teachers to 'teach to the test.' Work harder to involve families and communities in education. Extend the school year through the summer. Accountability standards for teachers that holds them responsible for things that are within their control. Teach society as a whole to value education, and educators.

[MineralMan]

33. I think those are all great suggestions. The biggest stumbling

block seems to be funding. That's the case where I live, anyhow. Finding a source for it almost seems impossible, and maybe that's due to the way schools are funded. I don't know. We may have to revisit the property tax model for school funding. The resistance has grown dramatically over the past couple of decades.

[Danger Mouse]

81. I always think about the old saw about bake sales and bombers, but it still rings true.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

40. "involve families and communities in education" GREAT idea--see post #30 below.

Some poor inner-city schools recognize that PTA meetings son't provide nearly enough parental involvement for them. So they set aside a large room for parents--a kind of community center--inside schools. These parent rooms have computers, printers, typewriters, access to job databases, fax machines, and every kind of resource parents might need to find jobs and otherwise make their families better off.

And they get funding for special parent coordinators who marshal these parents to tutor kids and to help the school solve noncognitive problems some children may have--problems that often disrupt classroom education. Parents who know a problem-child's mother or father may do a better job of getting their help than school managers who often are hunkered down behind desks and file cabinets in their offices. It takes a village--but most schools act as if it did not.

[Hannah Bell]

56. . misread your post, sorry.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

66. What do you think of the idea of parent centers inside schools?

Have you ever visited a school with a perent center and parent coordinator?

Some communities literally give trusted parents "the keys to the school", so thaey can use it as a community resource even after hours.

IMO these schools recognize the difference between what educators can and should do and what parents and the community can and must do.

[Hannah Bell]

70. i think it's fine, but doesn't get at the root of things. stressed-out people without money

aren't going to be hanging out at "parent centers" acting like middle-class suburbanites.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

71. Not even if they know people who've found jobs using the parent center's resources?

I gather you've never visited such a place?

You might have been surprised pleasantly if you had.

[Hannah Bell]

72. that would assume there are jobs to be found. if you have a plan for that, no problem.

but you don't need a parent center to have a jobs program.

decent jobs are the key, not parent centers.

i have nothing against parent centers, but they're not the key to the problem.

the problem is the draining of the working class.

whenever that happens, the rest of social ills follow.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

77. NEA.org has a great 5-page brief on communites-in-schools initiatives with an even better

bibliography. There are solid evaluations that disagree with your dour assessment of "Beacon Schools" and other efforts in a range of "It takes a Village" approaches to noncognitive barriers to evffective schooling. I've read a book by Joy Dryfoos on "Full Service Schools." See http://www.educationvotes.nea.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/WholeChildResearchBrief.pdf .

[Hannah Bell]

80. your comment fails to address my point. sorry, hull house has been done.

because that's what this "full service" bullshit is -- hull house, revisited.

i don't want charity colonies & welfare for social workers, i want equality & free people.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

86. "I don't want charity colonies & welfare for social workers"? What if that's what your STUDENTS nee...

What if that's what your STUDENTS need?

[leftstreet]

94. omg you did not just say that

:wow:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

96. IMO this may be a great example of what in post #21 I posed as ACCOUNTABILITY

for educators versus their own private agendas. See post #68 for what may be an actual case of the "blue slipping" example I posed in post #21.

I'm not saying that teachers are bad people. I'm just saying that even the best-intentioned people need stern taskmasters to force them to focus ALWAYS on results the community wants and not on what's most convenient or pleasing to themselves.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

98. What, no snappy reply? You're going to let me have the last word?

Well, at least for once we had a bit of real dialog about something meaningful in education reform.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

105. Kick!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

119. Kick!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

128. Kick!

[haele]

101. Those sorts of organizations are only short-term fixes at best. And won't work on half the students

Hannah Bell is correct - and most boomer would probably agree if they haven't succumbed to politically expedient Alzheimer's.
Hull House experiments and other "charitable" activities like Orphan Trains that social engineers of the late 1800s/early 1900's pretty much show that the majority of people will only seek the level of education necessary to succeed in their social group.
When my parents were growing up, when I was growing up, the majority of kids could get out of high school or even drop out and still get reasonable, socially acceptable jobs that could allow for a decent style of living. You went to college for two reasons - you were really, really interested in a subject, or you planned to be a professional like a doctor, engineer, upper level teacher - the high paying upper middle class type jobs.
You didn't need a degree to be a manager or a shop lead, you just needed skill and drive. You could even rent a halfway decent house to raise a family in - or even buy one eventually by the sheer grind of loyally working ten years to become a Produce Manager of the local Safeway or the lead mechanic at a local gas station or factory.
A Jack Handyman or a Grave-digger could make enough to raise a family and tell them "you can do better if you want to" - and they knew that they had opportunities to have a better life if they went to college and did well; but they still had the comfort to know they could make a life if they didn't.
But now - no college, almost no chance for being able to survive and work a job like your parents or grandparents did. Even with a Bachelor's degree, only half the kids graduating now-a-days would be eligible for any sort of full-time living wage job. Wages are stagnant or even dropping for the same skill level, be they Union or not; in 1991, one of the jobs I applied for, a Union Journeyman Marine Electrician (or Welder) started at $11.50 an hour with full benefits, including medical and paid sick/comp leave accrual as soon as you were hired. Certification testing renewal training was included; provided by the employer.
I recently looked up the starting wage at that very same shipyard for those same skills - Starting level Journeyman Marine Electrician or Welder starts at $12.00 (20 years - only a 50 cent pay difference?) with medical and sick/comp leave accrual to begin 6 months after hire. All training requirements and certifications were to be paid for by the individual.
Oh, and the technology and skill level required for that job is greater than it was in 1991; the Marine Electrician or Welder needs to know how to program their equipment, and how to deal with electronic drawings with layered views and notations,as well as being accurate, skilled fabricators.
$12 an hour might seem great as a starting salary most places. If the cost of living in the area where this skilled labor category is located was such that $12 was not just a dollar or so above beginning living wage where a single person could afford a cheap studio apartment, a diet of frozen dinners and ramen from the dollar store, and a transit pass to take him or her to work, and perhaps a little left over for an indulgence of a box of smokes and s six-pack on the weekend once in a while; certainly not enough left over to put into savings or continue their education.
Oh, and did I mention that it is harder to advance or get raises in your field than it was even ten years ago? Our skilled laborer will have to work five years to make a dollar more an hour in raises, and he or she will be constantly at risk of being laid off and having to start all over again at the same starting pay; previous experience not considered.

That's what your average high school student is looking at for a future. Decades of hard work, tightening rules, education or experience undervalued. Why should the modern student look to do well in school, if even his or her teacher's hard work to get a degree and the education itself are discounted by those in authority? If it's not expected that you're ever going to get more than a entry-level job all your life, if you're never going to be anything but disposable anyway, why take interest in anything?

What drive is there for a child that already has two strikes against them - class and "modern business economics" - to take any interest in education if there is no value to having that education in their future?
You can work as hard as you want, but with little more than a future that's bleak at best, that kid would rather concentrate on what little enjoyment they might have in life while they still can.

Schools and teachers that are valued in the community can help immensely, but without enough jobs available that have living wages for the children's parents and that could be waiting in their own future, why should they try?

If a society is going to grind the majority of their workforce down to indentured servants or disposable tools for a few elite to make profit on, don't be surprised if that's the amount of effort that workforce going to put into their future to participate in that society.

Haele

[ProgressiveEconomist]

103. Huh? How is that even REMOTELY relevant to analyzing the link I posted? "Alzheimers"?

[Danger Mouse]

82. I worked for the Beginning School Study AND CSOS - the Center for the Social Organizing of Schools.

So I've seen some of what goes into Educational policy analysis from a research standpoint.

[Hannah Bell]

74. there *are* easy answers. they're banned by capital.

[treestar]

15. I have met simpletons for whom it's a prayer issue

If they only prayed in the schools - they would be more moral and study harder and behave better. God rocks!

[MineralMan]

35. Well, if the deity they're talking about is omnipotent, as they claim,

a guy sorta has to wonder why it hasn't fixed things.

[Klukie]

16. It is a moral issue

The nation as a whole doesn't value education like it once did and this is the result. Our nation values money now. Our college educational system has turned into a money making system itself and now Capitalism wants to take on the public educational system.

[PDJane]

17. None of the above, which are peripheral issues.

The main issue is educating our children. Making sure they can think, not just memorize. Making sure that our schools are comfortable, creative spaces that will give the kids a refuge. Keeping track of things like bullying...and religious indoctrination.

Giving our kids personal attention when they need it, encouraging those things they are good at. Making sure there are books and art supplies and chemistry labs and physics labs and places to sit and read, lunch and breakfast programmes.

Yes, all of those things above are involved; teacher pay, charter and private schools, politics, taxation, money and social issues are involved.

But the biggest issue is the children who are going to be growing up with austerity programmes and a highly stratified, downwardly mobile society.

Tax heavily enough to pay for it, make education free or nearly so, ensure that the kids can read and write and cipher and think. Teach social studies and history and art and music, and ensure the kids have access to the programmes. Remember that you had to go to school too, and don't begrudge paying for the next generation to do so. Since education is a shared benefit, it should be a shared cost....except for religious schools, which do not teach anything that is a societal benefit.

[NotThisTime]

67. +1000000

well said... there is one core issue and let's remember not all kids are equal in their way of learning, but let's respect their differences...

[kctim]

18. Stop coddling students

and start teaching ONLY the important educational things, like reading, writing, history and math.

[haele]

102. However, music and arts are very often the gateways to understanding math and language

as well as history (which should be teaching the children how to observe and research cause and effects, instead of just rote memorization of dates, names, and bullet point actions). Foriegn languages help many children to expand their thinking processes. You never know what connects with any one child. Some are slow, some are fast, some are inuitive, some are methodical.
Using the term "coddling kids" is loaded, you know. It too often means "don't spend time with them and try to teach them critical thinking or reach their curiousity and get them involved, just throw the approved information at them and force them to pass the damn' tests when they're supposed to."

Haele

[kctim]

109. Valid points

But I believe those two subjects fall in with reading math etc... I was getting at the 'specialized' studies and wasted time that plagues our schools.

Coddling kids is not loaded at all. We can expect our teachers to actually teach only when they have the proper environment to teach. We must give teachers back the power to remove troublemakers and we cannot expect them to dumb down their classes for the one or two students who should not be at that level in the first place.

I include sports in the coddling category also. I am a huge sports fan and I believe they are important, but we have gone way overboard. I have been to high schools with sporting facilities that rival some colleges and that is just ridiculous. It seems like I have to vote against some kind of damn aquatic center every freaking year, but I have only been asked to vote for more computers once.

[jody]

20. Real issue is none of the doctors in education et al have a clue (1) what old courses should be

eliminated and what new courses should be used as replacements and (2) what old teaching methods should be replaced with new methods.

NOTE: every second of every day in school is already used so the above two options are the only real options one has to improve test scores.

I've been a reader on several Ed.D. dissertations and read numerous scholarly articles in referred education journals.

I've concluded that although we have major problems in education that educators in charge don't have a clue how to solve those problems.

A few years ago I obtained data from every school in my state on test scores, funding per student, and other variables.

I analyzed the data and found essentially zero effect of per student funding on test scores.

I also found essentially zero effect of race on test scores and Alabama has a reputation of discrimination that should show that effect.

I found a correlation of about 70% between test scores and per cent free lunches.

IMO free lunches is a surrogate variable for poverty.

What that means is for others to debate but that's just the way things are.

Jody in Alabama

[ProgressiveEconomist]

30. IMO the problem is NOT curriculum--except insofar as mobile students fall behind

when they move to new schools with completely different curricula.

IMO the REAL problems are noncognitive--kids dealing with

--health issues (hunger, lack of eyeglasses, painful toothaches that distract them from paying attention, etc.)

--behavior(disrupting classrooms, bullying, lunch-money shakedowns, etc.)

--poverty(worn-out shoes and other unsuitable clothing, now winter coats, etc)

Some schools deal with these kinds of problems by turning themselves into community centers that welcome dozens of parents every day and have dedicated community coordinators. These schools let parents and the parent coordinator deal with the many non-cognitive problems most schools are not set up to handle/ They have tutors, clothes clsets, washing machines, and doctors and other community resources on call. In your reading, have you encountered the "Beacon Schools" movement?

[XemaSab]

91. I almost totally disagree

The root cause is generally IGNORANT parents.

[MineralMan]

36. That's interesting information. I wonder if it's transferable to other

states than Alabama. Thanks for your response.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

21. For me, it's an ACCOUNTABILITY issue for educators in some communities

IMO, in the vast majority of wealthy suburbs, there is tremendous accountability, and schools work fine. IMO, that accountability is to powerful and connected parents. IMO teachers and education managers in wealthy suburbs are deathly afraid of parents' wrath, and that fear leads them to be quickly responsive to every little concern of most any parent.

In other areas, however, especially where parents themselves are poorley educated and individually powerless, educators are essentially accountable to NO ONE. Parents there are afraid to confront teachers and principals who are more articulate and more powerful than they. Educators are free to pursue their own agendas--whatever's most convenient for them.

One dramatic example of this lack of accountability is teachers' willingness to "blue slip" as many unruly students as possible, putting them on paths to "special education" and ultimate certain unemployment and likely imprisonment. Only 5 percent of college students are African-American males, many of whom teachers since 4th grade have systematically robbed of their right to effective education. All because some of them were unruly, needed intensive efforts to engage them in learning, and overwhelmed teachers who just wanted calmer classrooms.

Can you imagine teachers in wealthy suburbs "blue slipping" as many kids as possible into "special education"? Parents would not stand for it. Heads would roll, and quickly. Yet mass "blue slipping" has been going on in urban schools for generations.

IMO, many big-city schools need mayors with adequate resources to be made accountable and responsible for school performance. They can intermediate between parents (voters) and educators, and force educators to serve parents much better, or themselves suffer the consequences at the ballot box.

[jody]

22. I agree re "ACCOUNTABILITY" but what new courses or methods would you dictate n/t

[ProgressiveEconomist]

25. Thanks. Read my last paragraph for my recommendation of mayoral power and resources

I would point out also that IMO charter schools are a way of screening parents for willingness to get involved and hold charter schools accountable for performance, just the way wealthy suburban parents hold their public schools accountable.

But charter schools thus siphon off parental involvement in remaining public schools--they IMO help some students by hurting other students with parents less able to get involved in schools.

[MineralMan]

37. That's very interesting. Thanks for pointing that out.

[XemaSab]

93. Oh the irony

"poorley educated?" :shrug:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

133. I'm not the greatest typist, and for some reason type is especially tiny in my DU "POST" windows

I don't even bother to "EDIT" posts that involve just spelling rather than content omissions or grammatical errors, especially spellings that include extra letters. I'm secure enough not to worry much that DUers will think I don't know how to spell "poorly"

[LWolf]

112. I'm not sure what you mean by "blue slipping."

There is a rather complex process to identification of students for special education. I've taught in large and small districts, large and small schools, and 2 different states. In some places I've worked, teachers referred more students for special ed than they should have. Why? They were desperate for some help. Huge class sizes, no prep, no aides, no assistance of any kind, the only extra help available in the school was for students with IEPs. Of course, referring them didn't mean they qualified. In some districts I worked in, district psychologists came down hard on special ed referrals, not because they thought they weren't legitimate, but because if someone was put on an IEP, that meant that they had to be served, and it wasn't in the district budget.

In the district and school that I'm currently working in, we have more special ed kids than the rest of our district. Not because we want more special ed kids. Giving them an IEP doesn't remove them from our rooms or mean that we don't have to "deal" with them. We use a "push-in" model, in which special ed staff works directly with the classroom teacher, and within the classroom, to offer assistance to those students. And not just those students who have IEPs. Our sped staff works with anyone who needs help, IEP or no.

Do we identify too many? No. I don't have any students on IEPs that don't need the extra support they are getting. Why so many? That could be a huge thread all on its own. The reality is that our rural school draws from a community with a very low level of literacy, a community that undervalues intellect and education, a community that doesn't keep or read books in the home, that generally doesn't engage in the kinds of interactions with their children, birth - kindergarten, that help to grow the neural connections needed for academic success. That doesn't necessarily mean that they come to us with learning disabilities, but we do have more students than the average that DO. For whatever reason. Do we relegate them to a poor future? Not at all. They get all kinds of support with the core curriculum. They aren't being pulled out to run through a scripted "remedial" program.

We do have a few, a small fraction, of students whose IEPs deal with emotional problems rather than academic disabilities. That still doesn't get them removed from our rooms; it simply insures that they get extra time, attention, and resources to help them be successful.

My "unruly" students are managed within the classroom, with support from the counselor, the admin, and from parents when parents aren't the source of the "unruliness." While we will remove students that represent a threat to others, or that chronically disrupt the learning environment for others, that removal is never permanent, and is always accompanied by an intensive effort to reach them and help them learn to function positively. They aren't, and can't, legally, be moved into special ed because of unruly behavior.

Unless you are thinking about alternative ed, rather than "special ed?" Alternative settings and pathways for graduation for those who can't, or won't, function successfully in a traditional setting? Those can be valuable, too. A colleague I used to teach with is teaching in a program for "troubled" high school students, "troubled" meaning those that have records in the juvenile justice system that keep them out of the regular high school. They do their academic learning in small groups, and are also apprenticing with various vocations in the community, first to learn about different vocations, and then to focus on one they like. They spend a couple of days a week at that apprenticeship. They'll graduate having met academic requirements and having some job skills. If they want to pursue higher education, that path is also open to them.

Educators' agendas are simply this: To help as many students as possible grow as much as possible while in their classrooms. It can be demoralizing, and frustrating, when a student, or students, need more help, more resources, than a teacher has at his disposal during the time he spends with that student. Teachers aren't miracle workers, and are not, and should not be, accountable for solving all of a students social, emotional, and family issues as well as providing academic opportunity. If you'd like to see schools take on that role, advocate for a supportive system that can accomplish that, rather than blaming teachers. It's the worst feeling in the world to know that you've done everything possible within the limits of time and resources to reach and help a student, and that nothing has worked. Those "intensive efforts to engage" unruly or struggling students take just that: time and resources. Time and resources that aren't readily available. I don't know any teachers that wouldn't welcome support for more comprehensive interventions when needed.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

131. How refreshing. You've never even encountered "dumping grounds" for difficult students

in districts where you've worked.

But they're quite common in large urban and urban fringe districts with sizable proportions of African-American and Hispanic students, and have been so for decades. See, for example, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/01/AR2005080101493.html , about "special education" in Maryland.

IMO primarily custodial care is provided for entire classrooms of students "blue-slipped" out of regular classrooms. They no longer get education like the rest of the school. When they age out of elementary or middle school, many of them cannot read well enough to stand a chance in high school. As dropouts or push-outs, they are unlikely ever to hold steady jobs, and many will wind up among the double-digit proportion of young Black men incarcerated at any point in time.

Unfortunately, apparently, not all districts are as well-run and well-organized as the ones that have been fortunate enough to employ you.

[jody]

26. Looks like you've touched a sore spot with the protectionist education group with the un-recommends....

You deserve that for raising issues that bother voters who are asked to pay more taxes and invest in education but the education lobby is just as bankrupt as our banks.

Sadly We the People trusted elected representatives, bankers, corporations, educators etc and they betrayed that trust.

:hi:

[MineralMan]

38. I pay zero attention to recommendations. What is important

is the discussion, and there has been a lot of good input in this thread. I do not claim to have answers, but I sure have lots of questions. It's good to get feedback from multiple sources, I think.

[ibegurpard]

28. yup it's a moral issue...we don't turn education of our children over to corporations

[Ron Green]

31. As long as Television is the first curriculum (thanks, Neil Postman),

we're screwed.

[Hannah Bell]

78. i've been tossing around the idea of charter schools constituted specifically

to inculcate a working-class consciousness in children & youth.

imo, it's the only effective inoculation against the TV virus that fills them with idiotic notions of how the world operates.

a working-class consciousness is a tonic. there was a time when a lot of youth grew up with such a consciousness. it built strong characters that could withstand a lot of slings & arrows. it's also protective against obsession with consumerism.

unfortunately, those are the only kind of charter schools the ptb would likely disallow.

[XemaSab]

95. I'm intrigued by your ideas

and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Well you have to start with the assumption that far too many of our kids are being poorly educated

And I strongly disagree with that assumption.

I believe that what has worsened is not what happens in our schools but what happens in our society and in our families. We don't value children like we once did. If we did, they wouldn't be attending school in 100 year old non air-conditioned boiler heated buildings full of asbestos. We wouldn't pretend to be appalled by beautiful facilities being built for our children, like the new high school in LA. If we valued children, we would make sure they got the best and that our teachers were among the highest paid workers in our society. We wouldn't spend more tax dollars building stadiums where overpaid professional athletes spend a few months a year entertaining us than we spend on educating our children. We wouldn't give tax breaks to corporations for building glitzy entertainment districts that contribute zero property taxes to support the local schools.

Since we don't value children, we don't use our resources to educate them as well as we could.

But in spite of this failure by our society, our schools are educating our kids and graduating more of them than we did 30 years ago. We are sending more on to college and post secondary training programs. These facts of course must be ignored so we can promote the false meme of failing schools in order to justify failing to take care of our children.

We also don't want our children going to school with kids who are poor, or black, or disabled or who weren't born here. So we create charter schools and other special programs for kids whose parents are willing to jump through hoops to get them enrolled and we force another false meme that parents who really care about their kids are willing to do anything (like subject them to a lottery, which is reminiscent of a slave auction from the 19th century) to make sure they get the best education possible. Or we create communities where those poor or black or nonAmerican children and their families are not welcome so our kids (who we would do ANYTHING to educate well) can be educated in the very best schools.

Then we sit back and whine about how bad our schools are, how incompetent the teachers have become and how much money we have wasted (for generations!) and the lack of results. Not enough bang for our buck!

See, you have to start with the assumption that our schools are failing our kids. But in reality, we are failing our kids. And until we address that as a society, we get to continue to discuss how to 'fix' those failing schools.

[MineralMan]

39. You're right, I think, but when I say our system is failing our

students, I mean that our society is failing out students. We are the society. The kids are not getting the education they need and deserve, so it is the society that is failing them. The students aren't failing. We are. We are failing to provide them with a decent education, or at least we're failing large numbers of them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

62. I believe they are getting a decent education

Evidenced by the literacy rate which has increased and the dropout rate which has fallen.

However we could be giving them a great education instead of settling for decent. We can certainly afford to do better.

[awoke_in_2003]

34. Educated work forces...

are more expensive work forces. The elites want us only smart enough to do our jobs. All progress made by mankind since the middle ages is due to increased education. That is what it all comes down to- in the not to distant future we will go back to the days of only the rich being truly educated.

[XemaSab]

41. I think that the social problems are not solvable by schools

and therefore we should re-institute some form of tracking so that teachers aren't trying to teach smart and privileged kids as well as underprivileged and slower kids all at the same time and with the same methods.

It's clearly unfair to the more capable students to have kids just goofing off and warming seats, and it's clearly unfair to the less capable kids to have the teacher cut her losses and teach to the 75% of the class that is going to get it on the first round while ignoring the problem kids.

And to elaborate: I think art and music and theater and sports are CRITICAL, especially for poor kids. A kid who doesn't want to do a bunch of geometry problems out of a book might be more open to learning math if there's something like quilting or basketball or painting where she can APPLY the ideas and learn about the concepts from a totally different conceptual area. It's the poorest kids that need this the most because the rich kids are more likely to have tutors, youth soccer, and other creative outlets for neural development.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

45. MORE tracking? Are you serious? There are better ways. See post #40 above.

IMO, all schools at any level perform two major functions:

(1) Sorting, sifting, and tracking students into groups.

(2) Actually changing individual students' skill sets through engaging them in learning and delivering instruction.

Unfortunately, "tracking" often is associated with finding students who least need help and lavishing all resources on them, while providing mere custodial care to the students who need help the most. What a waste!

[XemaSab]

51. I edited my post to elaborate

I know that tracking does have that history, but that's the exact opposite of how it should be. The top students DO need resources, but you can also just set them free in the library and expect them to learn. The bottom students will never do that by themselves.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

58. In an untracked classroom, with kids who "get it" and kids who don't at each table,

peer tutoring takes place. And it's often not clear who gets the most out of tutoring--the tutor or the tutee.

And behavioral problems can be solved by some of the methods I've cited in posts #s 40 and 30 above.

I believe "tracking" is mainly an attempt to bring back "separate but equal" INSIDE school buildings in addition to BETWEEN school buildings, all decades after never-actually-implemented Brown V. Board of Ed.

[XemaSab]

85. I've never seen it work that way

I have done so many "group" assignments by myself that I allowed other kids to co-sign I can't even tell you.

And it didn't do either of us any favors.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

89. That doesn't sound like peer tutoring. Maybe your teachers should have given individual

assignments instead of group assignments.

[roody]

63. More capable kids goof off too.

[XemaSab]

88. More capable kids generally goof off because the teacher is trying to teach

stuff they already know. :P

[roody]

114. Not in my fifth grade class.

[roody]

127. Have you been to a classroom lately?

[NJmaverick]

44. K & R

[BzaDem]

46. I think you are right. Assuming we can't improve our education system because of poverty

ignores the fact that we can't really attack poverty head-on without improving our educational system.

This is not to say that outside circumstances don't affect student performance -- of course they do. It's just to say that we can't improve those circumstances if we don't improve our educational system.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

83. "outside cercumstances ... affect student performance" Then equip schools to deal

with those circumstances by bringing coordination of community resources inside schools.
IMO educators should be expected to deal mainly with educational issues, and they need outside help to deal with the many noncognitive issues hampaerinf effective schooling. Then why not bring that outside help right inside the school building, and give it its own room? See the link in post #77 and my thoughts in posts #40 and #30.

[SidDithers]

50. K&R...nt

Sid

[roody]

61. For me and all the other teachers I know, it is about the kids.

We are there for them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. Amen

[ProgressiveEconomist]

68. ALL of them? Even the unruly ones? Or do you or many of your colleagues "blue-slip" them?

See post #21 above

[ProgressiveEconomist]

97. No reply?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

99. Kick!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

104. Kick!

[LWolf]

113. Yes. ALL of them.

Two years ago, I had an "unruly" student. I taught his older brother. I teach his younger sister. I've been working with his family for 6 years, and we have a strong working relationship.

His "unruliness" was based on anger. He had a huge chip on his shoulder. I was never sure where it came from, because it wasn't evident in the rest of his family. He had an IEP for a specific learning disability; that wasn't an issue. He accepted help from any and all who offered it. In addition to anger, he had an intense need to control those around him. He was a stereotypical negative leader with his peers. He took his anger out on adults around him, undermining their efforts, not just with him, but with the other students present. During his 3 years with us, we recommended and offered regular therapy with our district psychologist, which he and his family refused. We met regularly with his parents. He met regularly with our school counselor, who advised him. We included him in the conversation, and offered every support we had, and every idea we could think of to reach him. None of it worked. We sent him off to high school with sinking hearts.

For good reason. He failed his freshman year entirely, and is currently in a drug rehab program. When I met with mom to conference about the younger sister this year, who is doing fine, she sobbed and I cried with her.

He's one out of many "unruly" students over the years. There is not one of them that I turned my back on, that I didn't care about, and that I didn't do my best to reach and serve. Most of the time, there were some positive results from my efforts. Even in the case above; while we weren't able to prevent what happened when our student got to high school, we DID maintain a good relationship with his family.

[fascisthunter]

120. good reply

[ProgressiveEconomist]

122. My hat's off to you for your efforts. But what are many of your colleagues doing,

especially classroom teachers who just want "unruly" students OUT?

I wonder how many such students turn to street drugs after school psychologists and psychiatrists have hooked them on Ritalin and other ADHD drugs. But IMO it's better to put them on Ritalin than to send them to "special education"--a sentence to ultimate chronic undemployment and likely imprisonment.

[LWolf]

124. I think,

if teachers "just want them out," the system is already too broken to meet their needs. It means that the support services needed to address behavioral concerns aren't there or are overwhelmed. That there are too many students needing more help and more attention, and not enough adults to meet all of their needs. Those conditions, over time, can lead to burn out and to wanting to bail water to save a sinking ship. Give those teachers options other than just "getting them out," and they'll use them.

Each time I've heard a teacher, or teachers, express enough frustration with a student to want that student "out," it's because they've exhausted their resources. Because they've tried everything available to them to no avail, and they see that nothing's changing. They want the student in a placement where change might be possible. That placement is not necessarily special ed; in my district, in fact, special ed services are provided within the regular classroom. There's no place to "go."

ADHD is a different issue than "unruly" students. ADHD can be managed with our without medication, and teachers see enough of them each year to have plenty of experience to do so. Schools don't make decisions about, or prescribe, medications. A student's private psychiatrist or physician, or both, have to do that at parent request. ADD, and ADHD, also occur on a long continuum between mild and severe. Medication only makes sense when other options have been exhausted, and the difference is between academic and emotional success and failure. Of course, the factory structure of our schools, with large school and class size, is the opposite of what an ADD or ADHD student needs: more space and less external stimulation. Teachers don't control those factors, though.

For the record, I currently have 8 students with the diagnosis of ADD or ADHD. Three of the 8 have a "special ed" designation: they have IEPs for learning disabilities, not for ADD or ADHD. One of them is medicated; a parent decision, not a school recommendation. All of them have systems in place to help them stay organized and focused. One of them is also highly gifted, but thinks that he is not "smart," because it's so hard for him to stay organized, find his things, and follow through on assignments, getting them to completion. His self-esteem and confidence suffers, so, in addition to helping him stay organized and get things done, we do our best to keep him focused on his successes.

None of them are unruly.

An "unruly" student, from my pov, is not an add or adhd student, but a student with severe enough emotional/social dysfunctions that he can't find success, and disrupts the classroom environment enough to impede others, as well. Those students need help with their social-emotional problems, and need structures to support their efforts to improve. When there isn't enough support to go around, or resources to create the support structures they need, they can indeed end up on a bad road. That's not special education, either. Special education serves disabilities.

Special education, while federally funded, with federal requirements, is implemented differently in every state, and differently across different districts in the same state. It's purpose, though, is to serve the disabled, not to provide a dumping ground for difficult students.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

129. 'Special ed ... within the regular classroom... There's no place to "go"' What a great policy!

Unfortunately, as I understand it, in many districts there ARE special ed "dumping grounds for difficult students". See, for example, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/01/AR2005080101493.html , about "special education" in Maryland.

IMO primarily custodial care is provided for entire classrooms of students "blue-slipped" out of regular classrooms. They no longer get education like the rest of the school. When they age out of elementary or middle school, many of them cannot read well enough to stand a chance in high school. As dropouts or push-outs, they are unlikely ever to hold steady jobs, and many will wind up among the double-digit proportion of young Black men incarcerated at any point in time.

Unfortunately, apparently, not all districts are as well-run and well-organized as yours.

[LWolf]

135. Every state is different, and

every district in each state can be different within those state policies.

[roody]

126. One thing we do is take them roller skating on the weekend.

Please do the same for some poor, unruly students you may volunteer to help. That is on our dime, 8 dollars per skater.

[roody]

125. Yes. all of them. We are always brainstorming how to

save our large number of kids who may be headed for a grim future. We are in a poor neighborhood and have many of them.

[cynatnite]

84. The kids have to come first...that's what this is all about...

I figure the best way to help my son's education is my working with the teacher. The teacher and I will be a united front and work together. I've put two other children through school and we've had a couple of bad teachers. One of them swore that cabbage patch dolls were possessed. Despite that, I feel I have an obligation to my child to make sure he gets the best possible education. Working with the teacher helps ensure that.

I hate that teachers get the majority of the blame. It bothers me a lot. It also bothers me that too many people are unwilling to get the necessary funds for our schools and our teachers. People bitch about throwing money at a problem, but I'm of the mind that if a problem needs fixed...most of the time it takes money.

I'd rather see the pentagon budget slashed and the excess funds directed at our schools, teachers, and students.

[Scurrilous]

92. Thanks.

K & R :thumbsup:

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TBF]

106. lol @ disclosure statement nt

[LWolf]

107. The real issues are these:

1. A vibrant, fully public system that offers equal access to high quality education for all is essential to a democratic republic. It's also essential to achieving economic and social justice.

2. Conservative, neoliberal, and religious factions have wanted to destroy public education for decades. Public education is a threat to those whose agenda depends on passive, obedient, non-thinking, easily deluded masses. It also puts a kink in the need for a large cheap labor pool and a large pool of cannon fodder.

3. The efforts to bring down public education have, over the last several decades, included: Underfunding. Understaffing. Overcrowding. A wide-spread and successful propaganda campaign against public education, public schools, and public educators. Organized and persistent efforts to privatize. Legislation and policies enacted that deliberately set public schools up to fail, lending faux legitimacy to privatization efforts.

4. Those efforts have left public schools and educators demoralized and unsupported in their efforts, the scapegoats of the nations willingness to place blame rather than take responsibility for the real causes of educational dysfunction.

5. Those real causes include: under-funding, under-staffing, over-crowding, and authoritarian standardization of public education; the determination to treat schools like a business instead of a social service and like factories instead of communities; the economic and social dysfunctions rampant in our nation; the inequality of funding and other resources; the determined efforts to downgrade educators from professionals to assembly line workers; the disdain for, and non-support for, public services in general, including education and other public services that are inter-connected; the meddling of outside, private, corporate interests using their $$$ and power to influence policy; politician's willingness to embrace harmful policy while calling that policy something positive, and convincing the public that it IS positive, despite evidence to the contrary.

All of your issues play into the mix. The bottom line at this point, though, is that it's currently politically convenient and popular to attack public education, punish the system and the educators, and "fix" it by privatizing.

For more about those issues:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=219&topic_id=26438&mesg_id=26493

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9380707

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9327114

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9246683

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=219x28915

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8905230

[proud2BlibKansan]

108. Excellent

[LWolf]

110. Thanks.

Between us, and a few others, we could link to pages and pages of information and substantive discussion about the "real issues" that have happened right here at DU. The information is there. What people do with that information is the REAL issue, isn't it?

[Danger Mouse]

115. This should be its own OP. Seriously.

[LWolf]

118. Thanks. Here you go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9539141&mesg_id=9539141

[XemaSab]

117. Word

n/t

[AngryAmish]

111. Some things to consider:

1. There is such things as dumb kids. If it will make you feel better you can call them anything you like, academically declined, et al. Everyone does not have a chance to become a doctor or engineer. We need to acknowledge that not everyone should be on an academic track. Real vocational education should take place. Not just shop class. Health care techs, CNAs etc.

2. Class sizes do not seem to count so much. Length of instruction seems to matter. Summer vacation should be shorter.

3. Teachers count but the timber of teachers is not good. Educational schools in most universities are among the least difficult to get into and the quality of the education given to teacher varies greatly.

4. Educational research tends to be complete garbage (ie who wants their kid in a control group?) We need real science in evaluating teaching methods.

[XemaSab]

130. Why are the only jobs you suggest for the dumb kids

in health care? :o

[AngryAmish]

134. 'cause that is all that came into my head when I wrote it