The Perfect "Public" School System

[bluebell]

Cant have your cake and eat it too.

I've never understood that saying. Why would i want cake, if i couldn't eat it?

An increased school year would not likely impede family activities to any detriment.

Says the person who really has no idea if that's true or not.

It seems unlikely that there is a drought of activity when school is in session. I am not calling for the eradication of summer vacation....just a pruning.

I live in montana. For the majority of when school is in session the weather is about 5 degrees with a wind chill below zero and the roads are treacherous. Not the best time for family outings.

I get what you're saying though, i really do. I just disagree. I don't think 2 months is too much of a summer break.

my proposal assumes that "teaching" would be what was increased, not simply "being present". I think your experience is indicative of the problem, but not of the solution.

I agree, there's definitely a bigger problem in the schools than just the number of days they are in session.

we have also stopped giving them whiskey at recess to "calm them". <------true

What does that have to do with anything?? Are trying to compare kids working on family farms to giving them whiskey or did i completely miss your point?

well, you cant please all people all of the time. Again, i did propose that individual States be responsible for their own design, thus allowing for cultural and environmental nuances.

True. Shorter summer breaks aren't really a topic worth arguing about. Most of my thoughts to you are tongue in cheek.

[LeSellers]

I think we should get the government completely out of the game, save only as an overseer, i.e. ensuring institutions are meeting basic standards of society education.

Why?

Government is not a better arbiter of what a specific child needs, nor of what a particular family needs.

The school's clientele is the best judge of what they need, and, given alternatives, will always choose what is the best fit for them.

Government's heavy hand is wholly superfluous, and potentially dangerous.

I think we should still be taxed, but the taxes instead go to Private Schools, i.e. Charter Schools.

Charter schools are not private schools. They are just as much government-controlled, tax-funded, welfare schools as the others.

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." So said one of our leading and wisest jurists. Likewise, the power to fund (or, more accurately, the power not to fund) is the power to destroy. If the state controls the purse strings, the state determines what is being taught, by whom, and to whom. That's far too much power to put in the hands of bureaucrats who cannot even name the child from his photograph.

They run things better, they teach the children better, the money goes further, teachers tend to be paid more, etc.

Here we agree completely. The problem I foresee in this scenario is that the state will impose "guidelines" on the "private" school and will undo all of those advantages.

Thus, I think private companies should completely take over the system.

Which they cannot do if they are not in control over the economic side of the business.

This would also allow "specialized" focus also, more vocational training, etc. Not everyone needs to go to College for example. The whole educational system would benefit, cost of college would go down, etc. You would also have more people that are actually "skilled" and thus can create, innovate, etc.

BINGO!!

The state is unable, and has no incentive, to do anything that does not benefit it first and foremost.

I frequently heard, in the Teachers' Lounge, variations on the sentiment, "School would be a great place to work if it were not for all those kids."`

The fact is that the school system is designed for the adults who work in it, not for the students. Whatever education may possibly go on in the classrooms, the purpose for gctf-welfare schools is to separate children from their parents and their parents' values (per Horace Mann and John Dewey), to keep children out of the real world (contrary to what some people claim), to indoctrinate children into becoming complacent taxpayers (by decree of Kaiser Friedrich, whose schools Mann copied and brought here), to eliminate the ability to think outside the parameters defined by the state (Friedrich again), and to provide jobs for a large number of people who are not qualified to do anything productive (Prussia once more). "Education" is merely the lure to get parents to surrender their children to the state for the purposes listed above.

All of those purposes are in direct conflict with the plan of Father for us, His children. We should be taught how to think, not what to think, to be curious about everything, not to rely on an outside force to direct our inquisitive minds in pre-determined directions. Every child I know (but I know very few from the inner city, where things might be different) looks forward to school when he's five. By the time he's eight or nine, he's bored beyond belief. And that's by design. It is not by Father's design. I leave it to you to determine who might be planting such concepts in men's minds.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

I've never understood that saying ["you can't have your cake and eat it, too". Why would i want cake, if i couldn't eat it?

It refers to the economics principle of "opportunity costs".

It means you can't both have your cake and eat it. Once you've eaten it, you don't have it any more. If you have it, you can't eat it.

An opportunity cost is the thing you'd spend some resource on getting but chose to spend it on something else; in this case, the cake. If you spend your dollar on a newspaper, you cannot also spend it on a pack of gum.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

One of the things i HATE about public school is how they act like they own your children.

It's not an act. They think they do. And they co-opt you into reinforcing that view. How many times have they turned the actual teaching over to you, in the form of homework? And they come thiiiisssss close to requiring you to do it or they punish your child.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

my proposal assumes that "teaching" would be what was increased, not simply "being present".

But "being present" is all that is required. They are "compulsory attendance" laws, not "compulsory learning (or teaching)" laws. There's a reason for this.

Lehi

[Calm]

Cant have your cake and eat it too. An increased school year would not likely impede family activities to any detriment. It seems unlikely that there is a drought of activity when school is in session. I am not calling for the eradication of summer vacation....just a pruning.

Canada makes do with two months, makes sense with a shorter harvest period though I don't know if that was the original reason for it.

I found two months to be too short because with three months the kids are sated enough that they actually look forward to school starting plus the teens view summer work as more worthwhile as they usually have at least two full month's of pay while with two months if the first month is taken up with finding a job, one month's pay isn't worth much. Also for LDS members if you want to work you have to give up camps and any family stuff. And even for those that don't work, two months give you one month to do church stuff and the second month to do family vacations and maybe squeezing in some educational/sport camps in between leaving no time to help with projects around the house or accomplishing anything on your own (I generally taught myself a new craft each summer as well as helped out around the house to get all the work caught up if there had been anything that had gotten out of hand over the winter). Much more difficult in Canada for my husband to get done some of his major projects before school started again putting lots of pressure on him, also harder to get time off if lots of fellow employees want to do the same, knew some who had to go on family vacations with only one parent for example....still over all, if you've got only two months to work with, you can make it work, just takes more planning and self-discipline.

[thesometimesaint]

bluebell:

Tenure is there to prevent arbitrary or personality conflicts from firing good teachers, as was common before tenure existed.

[thesometimesaint]

Matt Damon’s speech at the Save Our Schools rally, July 30, 2011

“I think you’re awesome!”

I flew overnight from Vancouver to be with you today. I landed in New York a few hours ago and caught a flight down here because I needed to tell you all in person that I think you’re awesome.

I was raised by a teacher. My mother is a professor of early childhood education. And from the time I went to Kindergarten through my senior year in high school I went to Public Schools. I wouldn’t trade that education and experience for anything.

I had incredible teachers. As I look at my life today, the things I value most about myself— my imagination, my love of acting, my passion for writing, my love of learning, my curiosity— all come from how I was parented and taught.

And none of these qualities that I’ve just mentioned— none of these qualities that I prize so deeply, that have brought me so much joy, that have brought me so much professional success— none of these qualities that make me who I am… can be tested.

I said before that I had incredible teachers. And that’s true. But it’s more than that. My teachers were EMPOWERED to teach me. Their time wasn’t taken up with a bunch of test prep— this silly drill and kill nonsense that any serious person knows doesn’t promote real learning. No, my teachers were free to approach me and every other kid in that classroom like an individual puzzle. They took so much care in figuring out who we were and how to best make the lessons resonate with each of us. They were empowered to unlock our potential. They were allowed to be teachers.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I did have a brush with standardized tests at one point. I remember because my mom went to the principal’s office and said, “My kid ain’t taking that. It’s stupid, it won’t tell you anything and it’ll just make him nervous.”

I shudder to think that these tests are being used today to control where funding goes.

I don’t know where I would be today if my teachers’ job security was based on how I performed on some standardized test. If their very survival as teachers was based not on whether I actually fell in love with the process of learning but rather if I could fill in the “right” bubble on a test. If they had to spend most of their time desperately drilling us and less time encouraging creativity and original ideas; less time knowing who we were, seeing our strengths and helping us realize our talents.

I honestly don’t know where I’d be today if that was the type of education I had. I sure as h*** wouldn’t be here, I do know that.

This has been a horrible decade for teachers. I can’t imagine how demoralized you must feel. But I came here today to deliver an important message to you: as I get older, I appreciate more and more the teachers that I had growing up. And I’m not alone. There are millions of people just like me.

So the next time you’re feeling down, or exhausted, or unappreciated, or at the end of your rope; the next time you turn on the TV and see yourself called “over-paid”; the next time you encounter some simple-minded, punitive policy that’s been driven into your life by some corporate reformer who has literally never taught anyone anything…

Please know that there are millions of us behind you. You have an army of regular people standing right behind you and our appreciation for what you do is so deeply felt. We love you, we thank you, and we will always have your back.

[LeSellers]

Matt Damon’s speech at the Save Our Schools rally, July 30, 2011

An appeal to authority, except Damon doesn't have any authority.

Lehi

[Nathair/|\]

I endorse what Lehi and others have said about putting control of schools in local, private control and getting government out of education. I worked at a private prison and saw firsthand the advantages of private industry over the state-run facilities. Unfortunately, I think that the closest we could get in the near future is a voucher system. That's less than ideal, but it would at least give parents some choice.

I would like to see something like the JROTC in more schools, only under control of the parents and community. My hope is that it would prepare graduates to serve in a "well regulated militia" as that phrase was originally understood. I suspect that our communities would be safer if law-abiding citizens knew how to protect themselves and each other.

I'd like as much education as possible to take place out doors. I'd like to see students raise some of their own food. I'd like a return to the apprenticeship system for basic job training.

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

I never said he did. What he is however is a concerned citizen who has every right to speek his mind that you have. Plus except for being a famous actor his story is very similar to mine. I got the best education public monies could buy.

[LeSellers]

I got the best education public monies could buy.

No, you got the best "public" education tax monies could buy. There is no indication that a gctf-welfare school "education" is anything like the best edcuation you could get. Evidence points very much in the other direction.

Lehi

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

Tax monies are public monies. California lead the world in public education from Sputnik to Reagan.

[Calm]

Lehi:

Tax monies are public monies. California lead the world in public education from Sputnik to Reagan.

Really? Because when we moved from Illinois to California when I was in grade 8, that year was basically a repeat of my previous one, especially my math class where I got permission not to do the work, but work as a teacher's aide (since I was too shy to walk across the street to take algebra with the high school kids) and I pretty much never had to take homework home from school except for an occasional AP English paper even though I took the advanced math and science classes contrary to my experience back in Chicago.

[blackstrap]

I was in the public school system for over 50 years. Some of you will say that explains alot. I am reminded of Bill O'Reilly by some here when he says that he taught school for 2 years and knows everything there is to know about it. He also says that a kid would never get away with saying %$#^&%$ to him. Well,some need a dose of reality. I was fortunate to teach a group of young people who were self motivated or parent motivated enough to be at least half interested in what was taught. They succeeded in an out of school and were consistantly in the top 10 if not the top 5 in the WORLD in international testing MATH and SCIENCE. I also was given the challenge to teach "stuff" to grade 9 boys that had no interest and no ambition except to disrupt the process as much as possible.Guess what I could "legally" do about it? They could be sent to the principal who would warn them and send them back.They could be suspended.OOOOOOOOOow ,that really made them happy. Anything else needed permission from parents and school boards.This situation has arisen within the last 2 decades mostly as the entitlement generation reached "maturity" and were assured that their children could do no wrong.

The current problems with education are enormous and not easily addressed. To advocate a system of "every man for himself" would significantly add to the ghettoizing(made up word) of society and assumes that most if not all families would spend their resources on the improvement of the children.That may have been true 30 years ago. Society has changed. Spend some time in an inner city school and see.Spend some time (not just an hour) in any school and see.There are great things happening in some schools despite the handicaps that try to tie the hands of educators. Good schools are filled with good kids,good parents and good teachers and administrators. Poor schools usually lack one or more of the aforementioned.

As a note,where I live,if a teacher leaves the public school to teach at a private school,he must be willing to see his salary cut in HALF. Now that takes dedication.

( Note to self: I must try to find the talks of the Brethern where they encouraged the saints to become anxiously involved in improving the public schools instead of supporting private schools so as to benefit the lives of the entire community and not just the economically advantaged)

[subgenius]

.....you can make it work, just takes more planning and self-discipline.

a more revealing symptom of our current society's ills i have yet to read. thank you

[subgenius]

bluebell:

Tenure is there to prevent arbitrary or personality conflicts from firing good teachers, as was common before tenure existed.

not true

[subgenius]

I endorse what Lehi and others have said about putting control of schools in local, private control and getting government out of education. I worked at a private prison and saw firsthand the advantages of private industry over the state-run facilities. Unfortunately, I think that the closest we could get in the near future is a voucher system. That's less than ideal, but it would at least give parents some choice.

I would like to see something like the JROTC in more schools, only under control of the parents and community. My hope is that it would prepare graduates to serve in a "well regulated militia" as that phrase was originally understood. I suspect that our communities would be safer if law-abiding citizens knew how to protect themselves and each other.

I'd like as much education as possible to take place out doors. I'd like to see students raise some of their own food. I'd like a return to the apprenticeship system for basic job training.

so the education system should revert to 18th century colonial america?

militia + farmer + apprentice =

[blackstrap]

so the education system should revert to 18th century colonial america?

militia + farmer + apprentice =

Sure. Then we could have the militia with GPS,the Farmer with a cell phone,and the apprentice with an ipod ,oh wait,that's what we have now!

[thesometimesaint]

subjenius:

From wiki;

In the 19th century, university professors largely served at the pleasure of the board of trustees of the university. Sometimes, major donors could successfully remove professors or prohibit the hiring of certain individuals; nonetheless, a de facto tenure system existed. Usually professors were only fired for interfering with the religious principles of a college, and most boards were reluctant to discipline professors. The courts rarely intervened in dismissals.

In one debate of the Cornell Board of Trustees, in the 1870s, a businessman trustee argued against the prevailing system of de facto tenure, but lost the argument. Despite the power retained in the board, academic freedom prevailed. Another example is the 1894 case of Richard Ely, a University of Wisconsin–Madison professor who advocated labor strikes and labor law reform. Though the Wisconsin legislature and business interests pressed for his dismissal, the board of trustees of the university passed a resolution committing itself to academic freedom, and to retaining him (without tenure):

"In all lines of investigation the investigator should be absolutely free to follow the paths of truth, wherever they may lead. Whatever may be the limitations which trammel inquiry elsewhere, we believe that the great state of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual and fearless winnowing and sifting by which alone the truth can be found."

The notorious case of the dismissal of G. B. Halsted by the University of Texas in 1903 after nineteen years of service may have accelerated the adoption of the tenure concept.

[Storm Rider]

At one time my wife and I were committed to the public school system; however after such dismal results the first seven years we chose to do something about it. First, we talked with the district to about instituting a more challenging curriculum. We were told that there was only $3.5 million for honors classes while there was $35 million going into remedial education. Then we requested and obtained permission for three parents to begin teaching a math class that would offer a challenge to 15 students that were interested. We then asked to seek out funding/grants to support this venture the following year, and were told no.

We then removed our children from public school, enrolled them in private school at significant expense, and were pleased to spend every dime. Our children were allowed to study in a school were every parent was engaged in their child's education. There were no behavior problems in school. Students were treated with respect and they respected their teachers in turn.

What is wrong with education in the public school system? Parents are the probably the biggest problem. Second, I think the union does a disservice to students and should be banned (of course, I would prevent any union from organizing in any public system govt, schools, etc. Third, allow the community to control the schools and delete most of the layers of administration. Fourth, did I say parents yet? Parents that just want the child out of the house, never ask about homework or sit down with their child and go over homework? Fifth, whole language or any other stupid idea that comes along. Our teachers need to emulate the manner of teaching in the five best systems in the world. No need to invent a square wheel; just do what they do.

[rpn]

There problems I see with public education today are (1) The teachers are NOT the best and the brightest. The ed degree doesn't teach the subject matter with sufficient depth, much less differentiated instruction, behavior and positive behavior supports and classroom management and research proven interventions (heck when the fed dept of ed tried to limit paying for reading interventions that work, congress got all in an uproar and they were fired --- probably because the lobbyists who represented interventions that don't work had their ear (Not there there is lots of research on most issues, of course). Textbooks and curriculum are a very big industry and there is lots of incentive to get people to use MY products, and very little to use what actually works. Several years ago I took all the teacher certification exams in my state --- most of which I'd never taken a class in, much less had any qualification to teach, I passed more than 90% of them ---passing score was typically 60%. Teachers get a teaching credential without being able to demonstrate that they even know the names of interventions or strategies that work and without having proven their ability to successfully teach a dang thing. I asked why we do this with teachers, but require driving tests for drivers at a hearing with the cabinet in my state once and was completely ignored.

(2) Teachers and the public have gotten pretty used to making excuses for lack of progress. There are low economic, heavily proportionate black schools in states with good standards where 85% or more of their complete populations including students with disabilities are meeting the standards. It can be done, but few actually believe it can be done and do what it takes to do it. I know a teacher who was hired on an alternate certification, straight from the army and assigned a class of 15 students in a self-contained special ed classroom --- which by definition means that all the students were unable to master the regular standards in a typical classroom. When all of her students passed the annual high stakes testing, she was asked how she managed it. Her response was that no one had told her they were supposed to fail.

(3) Existing instruction is incredibly boring in many classrooms. There needs to be a pretest, which students being able to get that credit upon passing if they choose, or retaking it for a higher grade if they passed at less than an A. And there is evidence that there is ZERO correlation between grades and acquired skills sets. In our state a merer 17 percent of the GRADUATES were able to go to college without having to take remedial classes last year.

(4) We need to publish by teachers the effectiveness of their instruction each year by name. None of us would continue to take our cars to a mechanic who loved them, polished them up, secured them BUT NEVER FIXED THE MECHANICAL PROBLEM. I don't necessarily agree with deciding raises exclusively on the results, but we absolutely should recognize those who can successfully teach, by name and objectively.

(5) A large part of my work is working with parents who went private after the school failed their children. Pretty uniformly after three years the parents tell me that their children are much happier, that they are spending a whole lot less time in conflict with the school, BUT THAT THEIR STUDENTS AREN'T LEARNING ANY MORE OR BETTER THAN WHEN THEY WERE IN PUBLIC SCHOOL.

I would use the Teach for America teacher hiring process and not hire anyone whose SAT/ACTS precollege weren't impressive, and lean towards hiring those with music experience --- since music seems to be an important component to learning and the data shows decline in learning as music was relegated to a subject rather than embedded throughout the learning as a pianist with a piano in the room can do.

[Calm]

There problems I see with public education today are .......

I would agree with all your assessments (the music one is the only one I am not familiar with and it makes sense from what I do know and have observed).

My only addition would be to include a rating of teachers not only on teaching reading, writing, etc. but also on helping children with social adapting as having had an extremely shy child I was thrilled with a teacher who finally got her feeling comfortable enough so we didn't have to pry her crying off our legs every morning (she was okay once she got to class as then she switched her emotional focus to her friends who were great, though she still remained quiet, etc), but who wasn't that great of an academic teacher so other parents complained about the lack of that kind of progress in her room. Since I could make up for that lack in the home much, much easier than creating situations for her to work on her shyness (family members' lack of presence being essential for this to take place), I would have chosen for her to be in this teacher's class even if there was a choice for a better teacher for academics available (it was a french immersion school primarily, there was only one class per grade English for the neighbourhood kids.

[Storm Rider]

(5) A large part of my work is working with parents who went private after the school failed their children. Pretty uniformly after three years the parents tell me that their children are much happier, that they are spending a whole lot less time in conflict with the school, BUT THAT THEIR STUDENTS AREN'T LEARNING ANY MORE OR BETTER THAN WHEN THEY WERE IN PUBLIC SCHOOL.

Calling a school private does not mean it is better. It means that parents have the choice to find the best available and enroll their children IF they can afford it. We looked at seven different schools based upon how they were rated. We then interviewed three of them and then we chose to apply at all three. Upon applying our children were interviewed and accepted at two of them; we chose the best of the two, which was also a nationally rated private school. The teachers were generally outstanding, the course work demanding...always, and our children were challenged and enjoyed their school years and were successful at university.

Public schools can be very good, but parents don't have the choice to attend the best ones. Private schools can also be good and parents have the ability to enroll their children. I will take choice every day.I am an advocate of private schools that are committed to superior education. If this is not one of the main reasons for their existence, they are no better than a child retention center similar to many public schools.

[LeSellers]

Tax monies are public monies. California lead the world in public education from Sputnik to Reagan.

The problem with "tax monies" is that they are taken by force (or threat of force). Resist paying long enough and well paid men in fancy hats, wearing shiny badges, will kill you. The concern I have with the use of the term "public monies" is that people forget the source of the money: it came from the use of force, it will be spend in ways the original owner may very well not have wanted (or he'd simply have bought the service or product on his own).

"Public monies" is a euphemism to make it look like it's benign, just as "public school" is a euphemism designed to make it appear as if the school were in the public interest, as opposed to the interests of politicians and bureaucrats. Taxes are not benign at all. They're simply legalized ("legalized" by those doing it) theft.

GCTF-welfare schools do not "educate", they "indoctrinate". Education is helping a perosn learn [n]how to think. Indoctrination is teacheing him what to think. GCTF-welfare schools are extremely good at the latter, they do not even attempt the former.

Indoctrination is their purpose and it has been since Kaiser Friedrich III, their inventor and when Horace Mann copied them from Prussia and forced them on the families of Massachusetts in 1852. Any "education" that goes on in a gctf-welfare school is purely accidental: it actually undermines their true effort.

Lehi