Fritz that’s great but the sad fact is that many school systems, and not just the VERY bad inner city schools, are a far cry from “getting what we pay for”. When I complained to my state rep in Mass. About our local suburban school her response was
“Coming from Minnasota I cannot understand why so many people in Mass. Are willing to put up with bad or mediocre schools. They just send their kids to private schools”.. ….
This, sadly, is true of far too much of our country. Here is some data you may find shocking but it is unfortunately the reality in the US today.

Over the 5-year period from 1997 to 2001, teachers were the victims of approximately 1.3 million nonfatal crimes at school, including 817,000 thefts and 473,000 violent crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault)(table 9.1). Among the violent crimes against teachers during this 5-year period, there were about 48,000 serious violent crimes (accounting for 10 percent of the violent crimes), including rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. On average, these figures translate into a rate of 21 violent crimes per 1,000 teachers, and 2 serious violent crimes per 1,000 teachers annually.4

During the 5-year period, the annual rate of violent victimization for teachers varied according to their sex and their instructional level (figure 9.1 and table 9.1). Over the 5- year period from 1997 to 2001, male teachers were more likely than female teachers to be victims of violent crimes (39 vs. 16 crimes per 1,000 teachers). Also, senior high school and middle/junior high school teachers were more likely than elementary school teachers to be victims of violent crimes (31 and 33 vs. 12 violent crimes per 1,000 teachers, respectively).

Teachers in urban areas were more vulnerable to violent crime victimization at school than others. For example, annually over the 5-year period, urban teachers were more likely than rural and suburban teachers to be victims of violent crimes (28 vs.13 and 16 crimes, respectively, per 1,000 teachers). Teachers in urban areas were more likely than those in rural areas to experience theft at school (42 and 26 crimes per 1,000 teachers, respectively).
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/crime03/9.asp?nav=3


Another survey of about 400 high school students, revealed that nearly half the males had carried a gun to school at least once. In contrast, a 1990 survey revealed that 4% of a nationally representative sample of students (grades 9-12) reported carrying a gun to school in the last 30 days. How are we to know what is really happening in our schools?
• More than 50% of all school-associated violent deaths occur at the beginning or end of the school day or during lunch (Anderson et al. 2001).
• In a nationwide survey, 17% of students reported carrying a weapon (e.g., gun, knife, or club) on one or more days in the 30 days preceding the survey (Grunbaum et al. 2004).
• Among students nationwide, 33% reported being in a physical fight one or more times in the 12 months preceding the survey (Grunbaum et al. 2004).
• http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/yvfacts.htm
June 7, 2003, Associated Press -- Police say a mother and her two sons beat a teacher unconscious at school with a desk and a chair because the educator had suspended the younger boy.

A Right to Schooling?
First of all, public school needs to be seen as a privilege, not a right. America is a free society, yet we are also a society of laws. We have a broad freedom of speech, but you can't slander someone. We license just about any adult to drive, but take that privilege away for DUIs.

But with public school students, in most school districts you can freely assault your classmates or teachers with little chance that you will have the "right to a free and public education" revoked. In some districts, if a student is expelled from school due to violence or other intolerable behavior, the district is obligated to then provide home-bound education (essentially a one-on-one teacher for tutoring in all subjects)!

In "Teachers say the law adds to disorder in classroom," from the March 23, 2003 Baltimore Sun, reporter Jonathan D. Rockoff concluded, "Educators in Baltimore County and beyond say the threat of lawsuits prevents administrators from backing their punishment of disorderly or dishonest students."
http://www.theinternetparty.org/commentary...=20030607000133
Students should be able to learn in a safe and secure environment. Even one violent incident in our schools is too many. Recent events have pointed to the fact that school violence can happen anywhere and students, parents, and teachers alike are expressing heightened fear of becoming victims of violence at school. In Texas public schools, the numbers of violent incidents and weapons confiscations is shockingly high. During the 1997-98 school year (most recent year available), there were more than 63,000 assaults and more than 8,000 weapons confiscated in Texas public schools.[1]
http://www.cppp.org/kidscount/education/schoolsnv.html


It goes on and on. Some schools are “getting better” but the level of violence is unimaginable to many of us. I grew up in Ney York City and went to public school ther in the early 1960s. We had so little violence, or tolerance for it, I cannot remember a single incident. The rules changed in the late 60s and it has been down hill since then.

Well Ted,

I agree with you and I disagree. Violence and genaerla anarchy is prevalent in schools now. Litigious parents and advocacy groups are the single biggest enabling force to this crime. I work in an inner city school (basically ground zero in the teaching milieu) and I coach in an average suburban school. I have seen violence in the form of aggression, fighting, broken windows and lockers, cursing and assault on the rise in both schools.
The largest problem teachers see is that the school is no longer allowed to hold children accountable for their actions. I beleive I spke profusely on this topic in this thread already. In my district principals are currently under pressure (if they liek their jobs) to vastly reduce suspensions and expulsions across the board because community action groups have determined that it is a form of racism to suspend a student.
District-wide students are simply being sent back to class for verbal assault, cursing out teachers in the most obscene ways, sexual assault/activity, you name it....
We JUST had a student slamming doors, yelling at teachers in the hall and skipping class. She was finally suspended when she called the principal a "female dog" at the top of her lungs. The next morning her mother came in and screamed at the principal for a half hour because her daughter claims to have never done anything.

Quick trip to the Board of Ed. and voila...the student is officially in the clear...despite the fact that three teachers, an assistant principal and the principal observed her actions.


Point is this:
It is the nature of adolescents to push all social (and personal mind you) boundaries.
This is what they do. When the teachers and even administrators are handcuffed in their ability to create boundaries the schools become chaotic orgies of adolescent fervor. Honestly, does anyone want to be paying for that?


As far as vouchers go, I an 100% sure that they WILL NOT WORK.
In my school system we are struggling to get minority families to take advantage of the FREE school choice program in which tey can go to surrounding suburban schools as early as kindergarten. Many poor, minoirties in inner cities are unwilling to venture out of their comfort zones. Giving them vouchers for a partial payment of a huge private school bill will mean nothing to them. When they cannot even pay their phone bills regularly they are not liekly to enjoy the half price cost of the $15,000 yearly tuition. Rich families, on the other hand, would love to use that money since their kids will be going to those schools anyway...what a nice little bonus eh?

Well what I would like to see are vouchers that allow parents to have a choice. Vouchers that would allow them to send their kids to a LOCAL school without paying a penny more. Certainly you know there are charter schools that would take this money and give the kids a better education. I would say that rules would have to change though.



As to your second point
The largest problem teachers see is that the school is no longer allowed to hold children accountable for their actions. I beleive I spke profusely on this topic in this thread already. In my district principals are currently under pressure (if they liek their jobs) to vastly reduce suspensions and expulsions across the board because community action groups have determined that it is a form of racism to suspend a student.

This MUST end even if it means taking on the “community action groups” Jessie Jackson etc. You cannot be expected to run, or work in a school where this stupidity is tolerated. The “let’s just get em through mentality" is nonsense.

Yes the nature of adolescents is to push and if they get away with it, it goes on. They also are able to learn when they see that actions have consequences – unavoidable consequences.

I met a man in an airport who was the principle of a public school who had the same problems. He quit and went to a parochial school where they did NOT have the problem and here is why. At the beginning of each year they met with the kids AND the parents and told them the rules of conduct and told them one violation and they were OUT. Then the principle waited for the first fool to test the policy, tossed the kid out, and the rest of the year went fine.

We either get to this in public schools or we will never save the system.

I give you a lot of credit sir. Don’t know how you put up with it but god bless you for your dedication.

What you don't seem to recognize Ted is that there is not one school system in this country, but 50 separate systems. Some do a better job than others.

Texas has had charter schools for some time. The results are mixed.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/acco...5/charters.html

Please back up your statement above with appropriate data.

There is plenty of data and here is some below. I know there are 50 separate system and would go further and say that each city and town can be another type and quality of education. In my state of MA we have tremendous variability across town lines. In general in MA the charter schools get the toughest areas and have made improvements BUT they are stuck with the same onerous rules as public schools. They MUST keep violent and/or disruptive students. In general my opinion is that competition makes for better (services, goods, etc.) pick one.


Measuring test score improvements in eleven states over a one-year period, this study finds that charter schools serving the general student population outperformed nearby regular public schools on math tests by 0.08 standard deviations, equivalent to a benefit of 3 percentile points for a student starting at the 50th percentile. These charter schools also outperformed nearby regular public schools on reading tests by 0.04 standard deviations, equal to a benefit of 2 percentile points for a student starting at the 50th percentile.

The study’s strongest results came in Florida and Texas. In Texas, charter schools achieved year-to-year math score improvements 0.18 standard deviations higher than those of comparable regular public schools, and reading score improvements 0.19 standard deviations higher. These benefits are equivalent to 7 and 8 percentile points, respectively, from the 50th percentile. Florida charter schools achieved year-to-year math and reading score improvements that were each 0.15 standard deviations greater than those of nearby regular public schools, equivalent to a gain of 6 percentile points for a student starting at the 50th percentile.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_01.htm

http://www.amte.net/becker/10-02-2004-responsecharter.htm

Ted you can keep repeating your call for vouchers as a way to improve education until the cows come home, but it isn't going to change things.

The good news for you and the bad news for me is:



The bad news for you and the good news for me is:



http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/13810895.htm

Link covers both quotations. Registration may be necessary.

But hold on, there's more bad news for you and good news for me. If our Republican President and Republican controlled Congress can't get together on this, then you can kiss it goodbye for at least a decade. While the Democrats may not capture either house, they will pick up seats. If that happens, vouchers are dead.

Sorry to play the power card, but isn't that what Bush has been doing of late.

Your only realistic alternative is to invest in and improve the public schools.

I for one have had it with “invest in and improve the public schools”. WE HAVE invested and the result is still some of the worst schools in the world. And, as posted, there is not a strong correlation between “funding” and performance in schools. We just continue with the same ol same ol and the schools stink because they are badly managed and have to try and teach students who could care less about getting an education.

Worse yet our teachers have to put up with disruptive and violent students and principles who defend the bad kids instead of the teachers.

Like it or not vouchers are the only way some kids will ever have a chance to get a decent education. The NCLB ACT IMO gives bad schools far too much time to improve. Meanwhile another generation of kid get a poor education.

But I guess you win and in 10 years we will be saying the same thing about the same problem.

Oh, this is a topic near and dear to my heart.

Questions:

Why is the US underachieving?

This is a complicated question that ranges from a poor educational system to misplaced societal values. It used to be in this country that people were hungry for success. They were willing to sacrifice and work hard to get ahead; nowadays, if someone fails at something, s/he cries 'Foul' and blames someone or something for it. The laziness that we have adopted as a society speaks to the larger issue of education. For example, here in CA, a high school exit exam has been implemented. However, some students who have met all the requirements but failed the exam (and thus are not slated to graduate) are now suing to be able to graduate. Huh? How about taking your lumps and studying harder so you'll pass the next time.

It has become ok in the US to "just try your best" without having real expectations being attached to it. Not to be partisan about it, but when a "gentleman's C" is enough of a standard for Presidency, you *know* Americans have lost their values re: education. We place so much emphasis on choice and opportunity and overlook the resources we really have.

I'd like to see education really valued here. I'd like a high school education mean you know the basics of math, english, history and science. I'd like to see college become a minimum standard, and see that everyone who can pass a reasonable entrance exam be guaranteed a public college education. yes it will be costly. But it is an investment in our future.


Are the education programs to blame, should they be changed?

Partly, yes. I don't believe throwing more money at the problem is the solution; after all, countries with less $ than we have manage to turn out highly educated people. Why is that? First off, there are standards and expectations--you don't meet them, you don't go on to the next grade. Second, there is more exposure to core subjects. For example, in India, different topics in math (algebra, geometry, trig, etc.) and science (chemistry, physics, bio) are taught every year. High school is structured more like college--you don't have every subject every day but boy do you get exposed to a lot of stuff over and over every year.

Should we adopt an educational style like that of Finland, Canada, Japan, or S. Korea or would this not work either?

Sure, there are many systems out there that are succeeding better than ours. But before they would work here, we as a culture need to ensure our values are in the right place. Enough wasting of time on whether religion should be in school, how many sports can you sign your kid up for, and so on. Religion should be family-based, sport should be done in moderation, and scholastic expectations absolutely need to be higher.

I know this is only your 7th post here at AD, but I would just like to say that this is a Damn good answer. Iwould also like to add that though the US system may be in an advanced state of decay, it is not alone. In canada we still have high standards and no litigating in case of failure, but it seems every year the 'maths' or 'sciences' requirement is lessened by a year, the focus on second language training lessened and so on...

Sad sight to see...

I'm in agreement for the most part, but also would like to add that we need to remember the days in the US when we held people (and parents) accountable.

I believe that I have the best example of this issue working on my team. A woman, in her early 40's, has a child that has ADD (or so she says). He has behavioral problems and issues with grades. Her response is to continually belittle the system and the teachers. While there may or may not be the best educators in this particular school, she never once mentions that the child should behave better and work harder for better grades. I feel that while the child may need more help, he surely could get some of this help at home in the form of discipline and parental motivation/support. When did it become the school system's responsibility to teach our kids a work ethic?

I'm confident that a large component of our society has become warm to socialized mediocrity. Basically, I mean that just good enough has turned into the norm. That allows those "just above average" to set the bar, and hard work and dedication have fallen by the way side.

This is coupled with cultural barriers to educational success and the pay scales of public educators. WHAMMO... a recipe for a lack of success. Who gets the blame? Of course the educators and the "system"... which frankly haven't a snoball's chance in hell of changing the fact that parents seem to trend towards pointing the finger in the wrong direction...

:blush Thank you.

As I said, this is a topic that strikes at my core. I had the benefit of being the daughter of immigrants. I know what my parents gave up and how far they've come, and I am so grateful they instilled the idea that education is the way to succeed in me. That said, having lived in India for a short while and experienced the school system there, it is amazing to me the difference in expectations there v. here. Children live their entire day by making sure they have their homework done and are ready for exams. As a nation, the middle-class (at least) lives by the idea that you NEED to be able to get a good education and get a good job, and that only you can do that for yourself. Yes, there are those who can't make it through a higher education, but they are the exception rather than the rule. One of the results, as we can all see, is that even without much in the way of money and other resources, India has a technologically (and medically) savvy workforce.

Oh, absolutely. When I say we as a society need to place more value on education, I know that means starting at home. Parents need to become more involved, and not in the sense that they come to school to blame teachers for their kid doing poorly, or participate by being busybodies in sporting events. Parents need to make the time to discuss school activities, know what their kids are studying, encourage and expect. So many parents think it's the school's place to teach EVERYTHING, not just scholastics but courtesy, work ethic, religious beliefs, and so on.

When parents start demanding from their kids that they do better, the kids will start demanding it of themselves. And if they need help, the parents should be the first place they go to.

While I agree “. Parents need to become more involved” that is far, far from a solution to the problem. IMO the problem started in the late 60s when we decided we would do our utmost to insure that poor and minority students graduated. You would think that the good intensions that fostered this idea would have lead to getting those schools and students more support but what happened in fact was that it merely lead to a lowering of standards and requirements that forced schools to keep disruptive students they would have previously booted out. Worst of all some of the poor students went on to college (where standards were also lowered) and became teachers! Add to this the abandonment of standardized tests (as in the old Iowa Series) and you have the horrible school system we have today.

Today 45% of our “teachers” are teaching without certification because they cannot pass the test. Today disruptive students who abuse, assault and threaten teachers are kept in our schools. Today we are just beginning to administer standardized tests and the results are as poor as we expected. Today even parents who desperately desire a good education for their kids, and willing to work for it, (and there are a lot of them) are forced to keep their kids in sub standard schools because we refuse to pass voucher laws or give these parents “choice”. IMO to blame the current state of affairs primarily on parents is to miss the point.

The NCLB laws do “place more value on education” and will make a difference but it will take a painfully long time and more needs to be done.

Ted,

I would like to see some credible, corroborative evidenced to back up this claim. What “test” are you referring to? Is it a national or local test? Where did you get 45% figure? Did you just pull it out of your hat?

Without some substantiation on your part, I’m going to have to dismiss your figures as nothing more than a vendetta against the public schools? This seems like axe grinding to me.

We do have a teacher shortage, particularly in the fields of math, science and special education.

Because of the shortage, there are teachers in the field who are not certified. Texas has, for a number of years, offered alternative certification. Under these plans, people who have degrees in fields needing teachers can obtain certification through a local school district’s program or one provided by a Regional Service Center—arms of the Texas Education agency. I’ve known people who have gone through these programs and they are rigorous.

http://www.ncei.com/Testimony051399.htm

Here’s a link to some of the causes of the current teacher shortage and, hence the number of non-certified teacher currently in classrooms.

http://www.nea.org/teachershortage/index.html

Oops, posted to wrong thread.

I did not make up the number but it appears to be not accurate for the country as a whole. Average # seems to be just over 10% not certified. I am sure it is worse in some areas. Regardless, as the stats below indicate “certified” does not always mean qualified. Our bad schools, and education policies, are producing bad teachers who in turn perpetuate the problems.

In addition we are about to lose our technology lead in the world because the number of engineers we graduate has been dropping since 1990.


Certification Lets Bad Teachers In And Keeps Good Ones Out

Here are the stats:

1. New teachers come disproportionately from the bottom third of American college students.

2. Between 1993 and 1994, the SAT scores of individuals becoming public school teachers averaged 923; the average of those entering other professions was nearly 80 points higher.

3. Between 1995 and 1998, individuals taking the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) intending to work in education had the lowest combined scores of any group.

4. From 1982 to 1999, the percentage of teachers with a baccalaureate degree in a subject area fell from 28 to 23 percent.

5. From 1982 to 1999, the percentage of teachers with a master's degree in a subject area fell from 17 to 5 percent.

This despite the fact that:

6. 89.5 percent of teachers were certified in 1982, the same percentage as today.

7. Since 1982, real (inflation adjusted) teacher pay has risen 12%


http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseActi...documentID=1140

Thanks for admitting your error.



Engineers receive their training in college, not the public schools, so this is totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand.



Gee Ted in your last post you claimed 45% of teahers were uncertrified. When you couldn't support that figure, you moved the basket and said certification itself was the problem. I find it difficult to determine what you are driving at, unless it's just ranting about the faults of public education. Whether we call it "certifiction," "licensing" or whatever, we have to have some process by which states allow people into the teaching profession. State legislatures can change the certification process if it isn't working.

Which is why you'll see, if you read my entire post, that we need to raise expectations and overhaul our educational system. It doesn't work. While harkening back to a golden era might seem the answer, we are not the same country we were in the 60s. Instead of lowering standards, and/or throwing more money at this, we need to change the way we teach, what we teach, and how.

Vouchers are a stop-gap measure, and not much of a solution. Really, we need to make ALL of our schools better rather than just shuffling the kids around. And to do this, we need bigger changes than any administration has proposed.

The first place I would start is lengthening the school year. We are not a harvest-based society anymore. There is no need to have a 3-month vacation. We need more subjects taught every year, on a rotation basis perhaps as we do in college. We need standardized tests that mean something, and if students fail, then they fail.

You want better teachers? Start paying them better. You want safer schools? I say put in metal detectors, x-ray machines at all schools and search hands-on if you have to. That'll make bringing weapons into school get old really fast.

This may be true, but teachers have never been paid well, which is symptomatic of society's unwillingness to place value on education. I initially went to graduate school in biomedical engineering because I wanted to teach at the university level, and slowly found out I rather like teaching kids at an earlier age than college. But having gotten my Ph.D., there is NO way I would accept the pay level teachers make. Not till I retire anyway, which is a good 30 years away.

[quote=Devils Advocate,Oct 25 2005, 06:55 PM]

Why is the US underachieving?

Because the teachers spend too much time indoctrinating kids in multiculturalism, getting in touch with their feelings, fear of hurting one's self-esteem, bashing traditional values, and other liberal gibberish, instead of the teaching the sciences.

Are the education programs to blame, should they be changed?

Outlaw the NEA, then privatize the schools with results based pay. Full year school sans 47 "inservice", teacher's workshop", etc. days off per year. Reduce the amount of time spent on "liberal" arts, and devote more time to the sciences.

Should we adopt an educational style like that of Finland, Canada, Japan, or S. Korea or would this not work either?

We ought to adopt one like we had thirty to forty years ago, but using the current technology. It got us safely to the moon with little more than slide rules.

Keep the multiculturalism, but as a single class instead of infusing it everywhere. The rest I agree with, assuming traditional values are along the lines of 'respect the teacher and other adults, pay attention, do your homework, etc.'

Keep religion out of school unless it's a class on major religions. School is for teaching the academics, not promoting popular mythologies, as some conservatives would have it.



The crack at the NEA is unnecessary and not particularly relevant. I agree, however, that 'liberal arts' should be lessened in high school and that math, science and English should be emphasized, with exposure to literature, history, civics, geography and other necessities.



No, disagree here. Other countries are poised to take the lead educationally and technologically-speaking. We held the lead before for various reasons; education is only one of them. I think we need to teach more, and harder, to keep up.

Why is the US underachieving?



For your information Yogurt, teachers do not set curriculum. State legislatures impose minimum curriculum standards and local districts can add requirements. The last time I checked, the schools were still teaching core academic curriculum--math, science, English and social studies. If any “mushy-gushy” subjects are being taught, it is as an elective not as part of the core curriculum.

Are the education programs to blame, should they be changed?



You must be joking! This sounds like the educational equivalent of the foreign policy panacea of "getting the U. S. out of the U.N. and the U. N. out of the U.S." Who will be responsible for outlawing the N.E.A.?

The N.E.A. is not an education program, which is what the question asked for, but an education advocacy group protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.



Sure, we need to resort to totalitarian tactics in defiance of the constitution.

Thanks again for the laugh.



What evidence do you have that privatization would not transfer problems from the public schools to private schools?



There may be merit in a longer school year, but someone would have to pay for this. Teachers are now part-time employees. If they work extra days, they will have to be paid for them. The days of self-sacrifice are over. Moreover teachers in Texas only get 5 inservice days. Where do you get this astronomical figure for 47 days staff development? In what local area is this being done?

As a point of information, teachers tend not to like staff development days. During the years I was employed by Fort Worth ISD, the district sometimes held workshops on Saturdays. Fortunately, we got paid for the time, but not at our usual daily rate of pay. After some rather nasty racial incidents, the district required that all employees attend so many hours of "cultural diversity" training per year. These workshops were conducted after school and we didn't get paid for them. While this may not have been a bad idea, contents for the workshops was scripted at the administration building and forced verbatim on local buildings. What could have been useful, became boring, even to the persons doing the presentations.

The same procedure was followed in “sexual harassment" workshops.



Science is in the curriculum and has been a concern since the Soviets sent up the first Sputnik in 1957. Other core curriculum courses like English and Social Studies should not be neglected. Students will be furure voters as well as future engineers. While producing scientists, do we want to run the risk of producing misanthrops?

Should we adopt an educational style like that of Finland, Canada, Japan, or S. Korea or would this not work either?



There could be some merit in this argument. I remember diagramming sentences, but it is my understanding that schools in Texas no longer teach parts of speech.

Technological solutions do not always produce the desired results.

Fort Worth ISD had a bad experience with a math program called “I Can Learn.” Its disastrous results helped bring down a superintendent.

Read About Fort Worth’s Experience with “I Can Learn” Here

In summation Yogurt, try to provide a little more substance and a little less knee-jerk reaction.



I agree that vouchers are “not much of a solution,” but reject the idea as even a “stop-gap measure.” Once we open that Pandora’s Box, there’s no closing it whether it works or not.

I'm quite aware that boards set the curricula, but they aren't in the classrooms. Having had two children go through public schools, I know how some great teachers, and some lame ones operate. Lame ones just spend their time "preaching" instead of teaching. The results are in the tests...



And I thank you for the laugh. The NEA is a teacher advocacy group, and the children are incidental. To believe otherwise is laughable.



I'm Curious, Do teachers get unemployment payments for the 3 months? I thought it was an "annual" salary.





Nay, just "tip the balance" a little. On the converse, I don't think one can truly understand the arts without an understanding of math.




That really is a pity. They probably found plenty of time for teaching how to install condoms and the like...





That reminds me of the HR genius that wanted to bring a "We do math" program into our plant, when a full 50 percent were hispanic and 25% were Vietnamese, I told him how about "Let's do English" first


In summation Yogurt, try to provide a little more substance and a little less knee-jerk reaction.

I admit it was "spontaneous" shall we say, and the 47 days was an stretch. Mea culpas aside, I stand by me belief that the NEA is the single biggest impediment to public education. (and parents a close second)

I still remember teachers faces, voices, and names from some 45 years ago. Likewise I remember many excellent ones from my children's schools. But I also remember my kids dreading going to certain classes, not because the classes were tough, it was invariably caused by the teachers attitudes or behaviors.

I don’t think that students are incidental to the N.E.A., but if we want to pursue this line of thinking then we could say the same about the National Association of Manufacturers and any number of other organizations. The fact is that such organizations are protected under the 1st Amendment.

The problem with discussing educational issues, is that things vary from state to state and from district to district within states.

In Texas, public employees are not allowed to strike, which reduces unions to what we in jest call "collective begging" rather than collective bargaining.

In the Fort Worth area there are four competing teacher advocacy groups: Fort Worth Educational Association /Texas State Teachers Association/National Education Association, a group affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, The Association of Teachers and Professional Educators (often jokingly called the superintendent’s union) and a for profit group—in my opinion a bad idea—called United Educators Association. U.E.A. has the largest membership in this market, but little in the way of state and national clout. It does, however, have cheaper dues, but then we generally get what we pay for. In fact, N.E.A. has little clout in this market.



This has long been a bone of contention. Several years ago some teachers applied for unemployment benefits in the summer and were denied by the Texas Employment Commission. Texas teachers are paid on a contractual basis for so many days. As best I remember, it was 187 days (182 instructional days, 3 professional development days, and 2 work days at the end of each semester (to complete grades and other paper work.) Other salaried employees make more depending on days worked. Counselors get paid for ten extra days to work registration and transitioning students to summer programs, answer parent questions about grads, etc. Some administrators are paid for as many as 240 days. I think it’s pretty well understood that teachers, like other professional personnel, will be paid their daily rate for any extra days.





I’ve never heard of anyone being taught to install a condom in English class, but it might "perk" student interest in math classes where length, circumference and fit are valid concepts.



I told a story about a biology teacher I had 46 years ago earlier in this thread, who came in everyday, told students to answer all questions, define all terms and make and label all drawings for a particular chapter. He then sat at his desk and read the paper. Under the appraisal system currently used in Texas, that would no longer fly. The instrument itself is geared to teachers being on their feet circulating around the classroom. There is some evidence that discipline problems decrease with a more proactive teacher.

See, we have had some improvement.

Do you have kids or do you listen to Rush Limbaugh to get the state of schools?

It's been a while since I've been in high school but I can't imagine it's changed that much. I have no clue what the heck you're talking about.

I'm not sure how eliminating the NEA makes any difference. Do you really think teachers are the problem? How can a teacher force a kid to work harder?

Maybe we need to outlaw idiot parents? When you have 50% marriages ending in divorce, is it any surprise kids are doing poorly in school?

But nice diatribe about unions and liberals in schools using bogus stereotypes.

I agree but to do this we need to change the rules that prevent schools from getting rid of students who refuse to follow the rules, are violent or continuously disruptive. The “golden era” is nothing more than a time when students were expected and REQUIRED to learn and follow the school rules. When teachers had control of classrooms and not the hoodlums .

NCLB goes a long way in the direction of getting back to standards, for both schools and students but we need to move faster. The inner city schools and some suburban schools are failing our kids so if you are against vouchers then we need more charter schools. We cannot wait decades to solve the problems. We cannot wait for stupid morons like Teddy Kennedy, who does nothing but defend the status quo and his labor Union friends, to make changes they will agree to.

You are RIGHT about the longer school day and year – other countries have it and we do not. But the Unions and their allies in Congress are against it.

And money is not the major issue. Teachers are most unhappy about working conditions and we need to change them. Other countries, like India, don’t pay teachers big salaries yet they are producing results because students come ready to learn.

Again, Ted, this is not the problem of the NEA, the schools, or the teachers. If we want to change the rules that keep the troublemakers in class, to the detriment of the rest of the students, we need to get the state and local school boards to effect those changes.

The problem with that, is that every time you expell a chronic trouble maker, the school system is going to lose funding, because the local school boards get state and federal money for schools based on the number of students actively enrolled. If, say, 10% of the students are expelled as chronic problems, the local school loses 10% of it's funding.

The other problem is in the area of personal parental and student responsibilty. I can't tell you the number of stories I've seen in the local papers, where a school did actually try to expell a student, and ended up being sued by said student and his parents because "little Johnny would never beat up kids, and extort them for their lunch money", or whatever. So the school has to spend even more money it doesn't really have to fight the damned lawsuits.

Very few parents are willing to deal with the problem in an open and honest manner with the school. It's never the kid's fault. It's always the fault of the teacher or the administration, or the system itself.


No, you're right. Money isn't really the issue for most schools. Some, yes, but not most. But look at your last sentence here again. It's not about the attitude or pay for the teachers, but in the attitudes of the students.

There was a story in USA Today this morning (couldn't find the article online) that talked about this. Immigrant kids and kids in foreign countries are doing better in school than our kids are, because both them and their families seem to have higher expectations for what education can do, and believe in having to work harder to get good grades than American kids.

And while a lot of this expectation came from those kids themselves, there was no doubt that it was highly influenced by the expectations of the parents other older family members.

Perhaps we here in America need to find some kind of campaign to get parents more involved with their kids education, get them more involved in making sure the homework gets done, attend the parent-teacher conferences without the suspicion that the teachers are the "bad guys", etc.

I tend to agree with NiteGuy.

In Texas, where we started educational reform with the H. Ross Perot Commission in 1984, schools are rated by state law in one of four categories--exemplary, recognized, satisfactory or unacceptable, based on the three elements below:

1. Test Scores
2. Attendance
3. Drop-out rate

Suspending, or even more expelling, students impacts both attendance and drop-out rate.

To cope with this, Texas has alternative schools. These are somewhat like “jails.” The screws are turned tighter and tighter on incorrigible students. Those who continue to disrupt, face increasingly tougher restrictions.

I’m not sure this is perfect, but at least it’s an attempt to address the problem. I tend to think chronically disruptive students and are better off in an alternative school setting than out marauding on the streets. I also think it is in the interest of the community to have them in a controlled environment.

The goal, of course, is to shape behavior, so that students can eventually return to their home schools, become productive learners, pass course work, pass the exit test and graduate.

Ted

I would be interested in knowing what you think about isolating disruptive students in alternative schools. Do you think this is something that should be tried nationwide?

For once, blame the student



There is plenty of blame to spread around, but our coddling of our children is one of the foremost problems. We all want our kids to have "better than we had". But at some point it gets ridiculous.

I was talking with a mom yesterday and we talked about football and how her high school son trains all year long for 10 games a year. Then she said something: "Why can't he understand that if it takes all year to get good at football, you can't get good at algebra in the 35 minutes you get at school?"

BINGO!!

We need to be tougher on our kids, not easier.

I have two, one still in public schools.




You are confusing the teachers with the Union. Most of the teachers are well intentioned, dedicated people who I greatly admire. I think the Union cares about itself, not the bulk of the teachers, and certainly not the children. I also speak from (non-NEA, but AFL-CIO) experience in this. I actually have been a shop steward and Committeeperson in a UAW and IUE shops. What money they don't spend on themselves or political causes, they use to defend the 2% of worthless teachers that probably shouldn't have their job. The 98% really have no need for the Union, and that's what they get in return.



I certainly do hold parents accountable, but they aren't being paid for by my taxes. It's tenuous at best to try and legislate parental responsibility for much more than attendance, and most places already have truancy laws.
As for the schools though, there are a lot of charter and private schools doing miraculous things with disadvantaged and/or inner-city kids at per student costs on par with public schools, so I think there are opportunities.

Sorry I was thinking about Math and Science and I have heard the number was that high in places. Below 30% is quoted and this is a DISASTER because they are teaching in the most critical area of education, where most of the good jobs are. We are so far behind out international counterparts we may never catch up. Schools and the folks who set the standards must be held accountable.

In recent years, as many as 50,000 people have entered teaching on emergency or substandard licenses because they lacked full qualification.(19) Thirty percent of the math teachers in high schools do not even have a college minor in math. The figures for science are not much better.(20)

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/PromPractice/chapter4.html

U.S. students currently lag behind their international counterparts in basic science and math skills. When comparing the 8th grade test scores of American students with their international counterparts, the U.S. is in the 32nd percentile in math and the 59th percentile in science. Yet, these figures worsen when comparing 12th grade advanced math and physics students around the world, American students are in the lowly 6th percentile in math and at a bleak 0% in science. These figures portray the stark reality that, when compared to other countries, American students are failing.
http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Education/...rbold04-15.html

As a current high school student, I have a somewhat different perspective on the issue than I've seen so far. Most of what I see in the discussion so far seems to deal with the issues of school choice, funding, and accountability. And while these are undeniably important issues facing America, they are not in my opinion the primary reason why high schools in general are failing. The biggest problem IMHO so far is that everything done in high school has no direct applicibility, and is measured singularly by the standard of tests. Why are countries like Japan and Korea cleaning America's clock when it comes to educational ranking? Because from what I understand (I admittedly have not looked into it beyond reading a book I found in the library and hearing concurring opinions on the net - please correct me if I am wrong) the systems in these regions long ago became hardened to, and perhaps even embraced, the concept of "teaching to the test" as a given, and the rankings of countries internationally are based on - guess what - standardized tests. On the flipside, a national government regulatory body in these nations is able to make sure that all the tests in the country cover most of the required stuff for a conceptually well educated individual, the books conform to this, and testing is done frequently and competitively with few chances for redemption so success is often a matter of the difference between financial abundance and poverty. This creates the high stress environment but comparitively good (or good-looking) achievement scores that is observed so frequently with these educational environments, as well as the creative frustration that is often complained about, as innovation is not something that can be taught effectively in this manner.

In the US there exists no localized control or harsh cultural and systemic pressure, and considerably more hands-on learning, and this makes the test based teaching concept not work. People are torn between concept and application. Nobody cares that A squared plus B squared equals C squared if they are not told how this information will ever become relavent to them in daily life. Nobody cares about Shakespeare's literature; few people make a living off of anything having to do with that, and the concepts of most literature taught in schools are either insanely boring, depressing, have nothing to do with modern life, or more commonly a combination of all of the three. Nobody sees the point so nobody cares; ESPECIALLY not if they can simply slack off all through high school, get into a two year college, and get the same benefits for cheaper, which is not an option in more high stress systems.

I personally think the solution in part to America's woes is to put more practical applicability into education through cooperation with local business ventures. For example, a high school trig class could crunch numbers for a design firm or a physics class could help solve some of the more benign problems of a city planner. This way students are actively involved in what their doing so it's more difficult to lose interest. There is a human contact component; there are people relying on your work. Cheating is out of the question because there is no "answer sheet." And business owners get help with more trivial work and have more time for seeing the "big picture" or consulting with customers. Everybody wins with community involvement. I'll say it again: the biggest problem with student motivation in high school is the constant knowledge shared among teachers students and the rest of the community that NOTHING YOU DO REALLY MATTERS! If this were not the case, I think we would see a turn around in student motivation; and with student motivation and opportunity in place, the other factors are largely secondary.

Just as a reminder, I am still in High School and therefore my statements are not the most knowledgeable around obviously, so let me know if what I've just proposed or the observations I've made are painfully naive, irrelevant, etc. Still, a kid has the right to dream :-)

I think it helps to have a homogenous society. One problem the US has is a large illegal population that doesn't even speak english. Not to mention a poor black population that is segregated.

The US also (and I think this is due to the mixing pot) seems to have less social welfare than these other nations which also affects how people are treated and their perspectives.

And I agree with above, the US does not have a lock-step culture that creates discipline for kids.

Diversity is great for the US but it also has its drawbacks.

rpgamer28,

You're hitting the nail directly on its head. Not much has changed since I went to high school thirty some undisclosed number of years ago, at least as far as directly linking high school education with making a living. What has changed is how we make our livings, and I'm afraid the outlook is rather depressing.

I remember shop classes where I got to try out woodworking, sheetmetal work, foundry clanging and setting type the old fashioned way. Guess what? Computers came along and automated all that stuff, and not only that, the factory jobs went bye-bye overseas. Didn't even get a chance to run an automated process.

Education is in need of an overhaul, but nobody in the world seems to have a clue as to how it should change. Should everyone study engineering? Computer science? Medicine? Or maybe studying the liberal arts would be better, because that teaches flexibility, autonomy and creativity so one can roll with the punches, recognize good opportunities when they arise, and get out of deadend career paths.

I have an example. My college work was in English and speech. While a mainframe systems programmer for a regional bank, a new formula for calculating interest rates came under my nose that confounded the suits in the mahogany jungle. With my trusty HP calculator, the scientific one that comes with an instruction manual (that I had read and studied), I ran the calculation and advised the applications group how to code it. The administration lady told me that I had displayed a great deal of power with that incident.

Yep, and the power was 1) foresight to study my HP calculator and understand what it could do 2) self-direction to take on the learning task, which was actually quite interesting 3) self-confidence because learning and doing had become my only career path.

Learning AND doing. That's the ticket, but when the institutions won't provide this kind of instruction, one has to take it upon oneself. As a result, I vote for liberal arts educations. That's what our institutions do best, and most of the learning responsibility load is on the students.

But then it is so much easier to teach to tests and argue about relative test rankings. Ho hum, that's lazy thinking at its worst. Actually, it's a bit disturbing too, reminiscent of institutionalism gone crazy, or in another term, totalitarianism. Get in lockstep formation, march march march march. Narrow down the vision, ignore the rest.

Anyway, the idea is to create reality. There's no way to test for that ability, but liberal arts provide good practice grounds. Being able to create reality might be the only way the US can keep its economic muscle. The other countries that teach exclusively to the tests are good at imitation, but somehow an outfit like Toyota beat the US to the hybrid car punch, which illustrates a different problem.

MBAs run too much of this country. From what I see, they all have bean brains with a tenacious hold on reality. Certainly without the ability to create reality, for that takes imagination. Oh, and by the by, screwing up reality is not an act of creation.

I think rpgamer and AuthorMusician make some good points. Most things taught in high school are extremely isolated and useless outside of school besides in a game of Jeopardy. Time is spent on things like "perfecting the five-paragraph essay" or "memorizing the timeline. Most subjects are taught as a string of endless facts. Students are learning how to take tests rather than exploring the subject matter. And how well can you learn when you're being talked at for six or seven hours a day and not doing anything, i.e. passive.

However, I think what matters more than what's being taught is how it's being taught. A liberal arts education is not for everyone. Students will learn better when they are interested and engaged, that's why they should have a part in shaping their coursework. Overall, education should help students become better critical thinkers and learners, no matter what is being taught. If the teaching quality is poor, few will learn no matter how important the subject may seem.

As for putting real work in the hands of students, it seems to be a good idea. I don't know how many businesses would be willing to try that, though. But at least it would allow students to feel they are doing more than menial worksheets.

Currently I am in the middle of Newt Gingrich's book Winning the Future which outlines his new Contract with America. While there are a few ideas that I don't agree with, others I find ridiculous, one area Gingrich has good points IMO is in education. There are a number of factors that are contributing to the downfall of the US Education system (which Gingrich equates to a national security problem). One problem is the fact that the rigorous student visa system has prevented the world's brightest minds from entering the US to study. They would rather go to a college in Europe or Canada than have to go through the process for applying to get into the US. Where at one point persecution and totalitarianism in various nations had the brightest emigrate to the US, the lower amount of oppression in Europe (particularly Eastern Europe) and Asia have had students opt to stay. What we have to do is make more incentives for students to study here and then get jobs here which will benefit out economy.

A second important point is the fact that our education policy has been simply to throw money at the problem and hope for a good result. What Gingrich suggests (and I find interesting) is an incentive based education policy. The thing is that young children going through elementary school really do not understand the value of an education. At this crucial point of academic development, children do not know why they are going to school and why the information they are learning is valuable. For some people, this doesn't even occur past high school. The material value of education such as getting a good job and advancing one's socio-economic status are not even foreseen. Thats why kids will not show much interest in school and perhaps be hurt by not learning important information that is necessary for development. What can be done is to give incentives for kids to do their work and learn. Gingrich had a program (the name escapes me) where 4th graders would be paid $2 a book for every book they read during the summer. One child read 83 books that summer and earned $166. Not only that, but she enjoyed reading so much that she would go ahead of the curriculum. This had the teacher label her as a troublemaker. Not very nurturing to a child's learning.

That leads me to a third point. We have to reward the brightest children with advanced classes (especially in math and science) and opportunities that will nurture their development. That may sound wrong to have a select few kids given rewards for their intelligence...but it would serve two purposes. First, it would allow for those children who excel in academics to have their needs met. Second, it may give incentive for other kids to work hard and gain certain rewards. The rewards can be as harmless as an ice cream bar (just as an example) because the fact that the reward is both material and immediate will have the child repeat the behavior if only for the sake of having more ice cream. Once the benefits of an education are self-realized, then the incentives should be less material, and more of future benefit.

Furthermore, the way that education is applied should be changed IMO. It is a crime for kids to go into college not knowing who important people in history such as Keynes, Hayek, or philosophers like Locke. High school is when more advanced subjects such as physics, chemistry, and calculus are introduced. While these subjects are no doubt important...i found that being forced to take them was somehow wrong when my strengths are found elsewhere. I have always seen my mind as a logical and/or analytical one with math and science being my least favorite subjects. Government and history were more favored. I was even able to take a philosophy class. The point I am making is that by the time students are half way through high school, that they have a pretty good idea of where their strengths and weaknesses are. I think that these students should be given the opportunity to take other subjects which focus on their strengths. Why don't high schools have more classes on philosophy, business, politics, and law which could allow for students to have skills that will better prepare them for college? Instead of math and science, I could have taken classes on law and philosophy and actually could of enjoyed what I was learning. But no...the choices are limited and thus the success is limited. This idea of getting a well-rounded education is a bad idea to me. Focus on the strengths and you will get the best results. Wasting time on subjects that have no bearing on a students real ability only hurts the student because that time could be filled with a class that helps the kid get a better grasp on their favorite areas of study.

Now what to do in Washington? Well first, give the power to educate back to the states as it should. Washington should be the one in the passenger seat reading off a map with the States in the driver's seat. The federal government should take the incredible waste of money that they spend on do-nothing programs and focus on research for the best ways to develop children's strengths. Present these stats to the States and let them make their own decisions. If you force it upon every state to go about the same form of education policy, then you have no basis of comparison for if a system is working. If one state implements the new policy and it works, then other states will most likely follow suit.

Education is extremely important as we enter the second age of globalization. The world is getting smaller and the American economy depends on its educated citizens to keep them competitive. With China and India developing their education systems, we are more threatened then ever to lose our standing as the world's premiere country for academics. Its time for change, not an increase in funds.

You lost me here. What does “hands on leaning” have to do with not learning the basics required for future achievement in college and then the workplace? Certainly every student in high school should learn the basics and be proficient in English, math, science, etc. Those that are not interested in college should be allowed to go down the “business” or trade path.

Our problem is we have gone away from the philosophy of the 50s and 60s which demanded proficiency to even move from grade to grade in high school. Today unqualified teachers promote unqualified students and dump them on the workplace. Colleges have to have remedial reading and math for many students.

On NPR this weekend I listened to a story about a girl in a Calif. High school and he struggle to pass the, now required, state exam in English and Math. She had taken the test 8 times and failed both and in the end she passed the English but still failed the math and was given a certificate and not a diploma. She was helped and had people rooting for her and she failed. The school of course was against the “high stakes” testing.

What was fluffed over quickly but floored me was the criteria for the test. The math was 8th grade and the English 10th grade!!!!

So here is a school that has moved this girl through 4 years of math and she cannot pass a test based on 8th grade math?????

We are doomed if this is the best we can do in educating our kids.