re: Spinoff - re: Paying teachers to teach at bad schools........Soapbox #3

quote:

---

quote:
That's pretty much my point 1.
It starts before they even arrive at kindergarten

---

Dead on. I've taught kids from pre-k though 12 and have found that many of the kids who drop out and are discipline problems simply cannot read to learn. For many of them, when they show up at school, it's the first time they have had some one read them a book. They are behind before they even begin.

This is why it is important to have local level curriculums. The kids who are reading, push them farther. The kids who are not should be reading all day. Furthermore, we need to continue the JumpStart program which teaches kids skills for trade instead of the everyone goes to college approach. However, this needs to be expanded down to the middle school level. We can identify these kids in about the 4th/5th grade. We know who our college bound kids are. At that age, we should begin the process of training them for trades instead of trying to get them to read on an 8th grade level.

Last, I'm very proud of the actual discussion in here today instead of the usual teacher bashing that goes on.

quote:

---

i've posted for years that my political philosophy is that we should enact policies to reward good decision makers and punish bad ones.

---

School choice.

quote:

---

a bunch of liberals told me they lost all respect for me for demonizing the bad kids. Tuba, iirc, was the ringleader

---

to me that's silly. People should look at it as we are recognizing that Within These communities are some children who could succeed but our drug down by those around them. We can't save everyone. There is literally no policy that would do that. Any and all policies should be focused on saving the most children we can. If that requires expelling not suspending but expelling significant numbers of the other little frickers then that's what we have to do

I tell people all the time that get indignant when I talk like that. Look those of us who are thinking about these things are doing so because the savings would help us. I'm perfectly happy with my kids school just like most parents in Suburbia are. We could likely sit back and do absolutely nothing and our children would still receive decent education

The way I look at it in the poor communities it's simple. Sure there are some kids who managed to fight through and still succeed. But there is absolutely no denying that there is a significant number of children in those communities who could succeed if the environment wasn't complete shite

Those kids are our targets. Those kids are the ones who down the line might improve their communities. That genius kid that fights through and gets his scholarship to Harvard and leave the community isn't going to have near the effect that the Fairly bright kid who just manages to squeeze into college and set the basis for a normal life will have.

But for some stupid reason everybody wants us to worry about group 3. The group of kids who are lost causes. Now I totally get that they are lost causes because of the influences around them but we can't solve that.

Therefore we need to solve what we can

As a public school teacher, here is my take. The issues are as follows:
1. Low expectations from home. If the parents are uneducated, then receiving a quality education seems generally (not always) of little value.
2. State legislation from the uninformed. Politicians want to be re-elected. As such, they design education initiatives. One of those initiatives is that 80% of incoming freshmen must graduate in four years. Maybe it is my military background, but how about we work on the process until we actually are able to complete things correctly. Low performing schools in urban areas are basically giving grades to meet the criteria. The result: unprepared graduates. This concept is spreading unfortunately.
3. Federal legislation. No child left behind was well intended legislation, but was moronic in its application IMO. The biggest issue though is special education. Students now have more "accommodations" than you can believe...lowering the bar IMO. These "accommodations" are also behavioral in nature. In short, kids are allowed to act in an unacceptable manner. Needless to say, these "accommodations" hinder the effort of the teacher concerning the rest of the class...especially when dealing with perpetual behavioral issues. These are the same "adults " that seem to be the center of controversy concerning issues involving the police.
4. Motivation by the students. In short, many of the students that I see doing poorly simply don't care. This lack of motivation could be due to teachers that aren't designing engaging lessons, the early start of the school day (it seems weak, but is legitimately backed by data),
or lastly that they don't need any more than a high school diploma (family business...your name is on the building, the tech industry...if you are certified, that is a foot in the door of that occupation, or...for the exceptionally lucky - you are trust fund kid). On the other end of the spectrum, some students don't seem to actually want more than a high school diploma. We have created a portion of our population that is more than willing to live off of the government. As a result...who needs to work. Their parents have modeled laziness that is rewarded.

To remedy the issues:
1. Kick out the assholes
2. Fail kids that can't cut it
3. Actually monitor the ability of the teachers and fire the weak ones
4. Remove the politics beyond the local level

Just my .02

quote:

---

I just can't accept that there is no hope for changing this behavior.

---

Good, because there is hope. There is a method. It does not involve throwing more money (e.g., your grant) at a broken model though.

quote:

---

The biggest issue though is special education. Students now have more "accommodations" than you can believe...lowering the bar IMO.

---

But these kids still have to take the same state test usually.

Had a conversation about public schools in France with a Parisian friend recently, and he said they have a point system for teachers that works well in getting good teachers to put time in at "bad" schools. The bad schools allow the teachers to rack up a bunch of points quickly that they can then use to get into the best schools, so teachers who want to teach at the best schools are incentivized to put time in at struggling schools first.

quote:

---

1. Kick out the assholes
2. Fail kids that can't cut it
3. Actually monitor the ability of the teachers and fire the weak ones
4. Remove the politics beyond the local level

---

Reign in "entitlements" many kids don't give a shite about their education, because there is a safety net there to live on. They look at home and mom has a house, car, new cell phone, new shoe, food to eat, and booze to drink.

quote:

---

1. Low expectations from home. If the parents are uneducated, then receiving a quality education seems generally (not always) of little value

---

yep

quote:

---

State legislation from the uninformed. Politicians want to be re-elected. As such, they design education initiatives. One of those initiatives is that 80% of incoming freshmen must graduate in four years

---

I hate shite like that. I don't care if you're in schools or any other environment. Setting arbitrary goals like 80% must graduate actually encourage the very Behavior you're hoping to discourage. If the problem is people graduating uneducated mandating graduation simply increases the odds that people will graduate on educated.

I don't have time to get the rest at the moment but I'll be back

Why do schools suck?

1. It's a government program, therefore it does the opposite of what it is purported to do

2. Truancy laws. Most Kids should not be in school for 12 years. Forcing kids into school is essentially telling the parent that the state owns their children.