Eehhh....I have my doubts. It presumes the students are capable and have the desire to learn and/or improve. I don't think that's necessarily the case.
and the responsibility and role of the parent at home
But I must say, I thought some teachers back in high school were far more deserving than others based on their teaching methods and every day interaction with students.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am Posts: 22978 Gender: Male
I Hail Randy Moss wrote:
But I must say, I thought some teachers back in high school were far more deserving than others based on their teaching methods and every day interaction with students.
Of course there are good teachers and bad teachers. And Of Course the good teachers should be compensated better than the shitty ones. The problem is, a good teacher is going to teach you things you need to know, and may be able to use in your real life. Bad teachers are going to forgo all that to "teach to the test"
Most of the problems in education are symptoms of systemic rot. Jiggering periphery issues like classroom size and teacher pay is, for all intents and purposes, futile.
Education will not and cannot improve until the incentives of everyone involved (but particularly families and administrators) are improved.
The problem is, a good teacher is going to teach you things you need to know, and may be able to use in your real life.
Which begs the question, "What do we want our children to learn?'' I don't yet have any kids, but when I answer hypothetically for what I would want my child to learn, only a fraction of that content is taught in public school (or private schools, for that matter).
Eehhh....I have my doubts. It presumes the students are capable and have the desire to learn and/or improve. I don't think that's necessarily the case.
I'm not talking implementation. I'm saying I think it's a more relevant discussion to have, in terms of impact on education.
thodoks wrote:
Most of the problems in education are symptoms of systemic rot.
Define these feelings a little more for me.
Quote:
Jiggering periphery issues like classroom size and teacher pay is, for all intents and purposes, futile.
Education will not and cannot improve until the incentives of everyone involved (but particularly families and administrators) are improved.
The problem is, a good teacher is going to teach you things you need to know, and may be able to use in your real life.
Which begs the question, "What do we want our children to learn?'' I don't yet have any kids, but when I answer hypothetically for what I would want my child to learn, only a fraction of that content is taught in public school (or private schools, for that matter).
The question you're really asking is, "What exactly should an education system encompass?" The mass refusal to answer that question is exactly why a public education today covers 70% more information than it did 30 years ago, and subsequently why that information is rushed through without pause.
In a perfect world, a society's education would be supplemented by learning at home. In the real world, people just want to keep adding to the list.
Most of the problems in education are symptoms of systemic rot.
Define these feelings a little more for me.
Willing familial abdication of basic parenting responsibilities and guidance. Insulation of individuals from the consequences of their poor decisions, and the construction of institutional obstacles that make it exceedingly difficult to reward their good ones. Politicized schools and institutions that homogenize curriculum and sacrifice alternatives to the status quo for political expediency.
McParadigm wrote:
thodoks wrote:
Jiggering periphery issues like classroom size and teacher pay is, for all intents and purposes, futile.
Education will not and cannot improve until the incentives of everyone involved (but particularly families and administrators) are improved.
Willing familial abdication of basic parenting responsibilities and guidance.
I'm not convinced of this. I'll grant you that I'm looking at a microcosm, but I see parents in tears all the time because they feel as helpless as anybody. Legally, parent rights are pretty thin these days. I'm not saying there aren't a ton of "my kid is never wrong" types, but most people are concerned and desperate.
Quote:
Insulation of individuals from the consequences of their poor decisions
Or, more accurately, the consequences are delivered on the people around them. Sure.
Quote:
the construction of institutional obstacles that make it exceedingly difficult to reward their good ones.
Sure.
Quote:
Politicized schools and institutions that homogenize curriculum and sacrifice alternatives to the status quo for political expediency.
Now you hit a pet peeve of mine. Schools don't homogenize curriculum. Schools don't have any say about curriculum. One thing that I wish people would do is distinguish between schools and districts. Districts exercise total control and are run by lawyers and businessmen. Schools are full of teachers who have no influence over those decisions (most of whom, by the way, would agree with you completely about the loss of alternatives and the homogenization of education).
The problem is, a good teacher is going to teach you things you need to know, and may be able to use in your real life.
Which begs the question, "What do we want our children to learn?'' I don't yet have any kids, but when I answer hypothetically for what I would want my child to learn, only a fraction of that content is taught in public school (or private schools, for that matter).
The question you're really asking is, "What exactly should an education system encompass?" The mass refusal to answer that question is exactly why a public education today covers 70% more information than it did 30 years ago, and subsequently why that information is rushed through without pause.
In a perfect world, a society's education would be supplemented by learning at home. In the real world, people just want to keep adding to the list.
I'm actually driving at something a bit more fundamental. I question the notion of an education "system" in the first place, as it disassociates familial responsibilities to educate and socialize their children. What I want out of an education "system" is the ability to reject it (or reward it), the ability to hold it and its associated constituents accountable, and alternatives available to me should I so desire them.
And I agree with your distinction regarding what should be expected of educators, and what is expected of educators. As an educator, it's your job, not your responsibility, to educate the children in front of you. That is, asking a teacher to be responsible for the education of 150 students - besides being a misplaced question in the first place - isn't feasible without unintended consequences (teacher turnover rates, burning out, self-selection issues, etc). It's the responsibility of each child's respective guardians to determine whether the child is being educated. The complexion of any "system" worth having will reflect the preferences of individual parents and guardians, and enable them to find an outlet that best reflects the relative aptitudes and interests of their children. The politicization and kitchen-sinking of curricula is a pretty good example of everything that's wrong with education as-is.
Willing familial abdication of basic parenting responsibilities and guidance.
I'm not convinced of this. I'll grant you that I'm looking at a microcosm, but I see parents in tears all the time because they feel as helpless as anybody. Legally, parent rights are pretty thin these days. I'm not saying there aren't a ton of "my kid is never wrong" types, but most people are concerned and desperate.
Oh I'm sure there are parents that really care and do great jobs at home. I admittedly saw much less of that while in Philadelphia than I did brutal negligence. But, again, that two distinctly different problems exist in two distinctly different communities and environments underscores a large part of centralization's downside.
I started a thread a while ago about the fundamental societal wedge no longer being Republican vs Democrat, or Conservative vs Liberal, or Public vs Private, but instead Individual vs Institution. When I say "centralization," I don't mean that to be a euphemism for "public." And your anecdote describes perfectly my frustrations with the entirety of the way in which education is configured: there are very, very few means available for those concerned and desperate parents to right what they see is wrong. That's part of the systemic rot I mentioned above.
McParadigm wrote:
thodoks wrote:
Politicized schools and institutions that homogenize curriculum and sacrifice alternatives to the status quo for political expediency.
Now you hit a pet peeve of mine. Schools don't homogenize curriculum. Schools don't have any say about curriculum. One thing that I wish people would do is distinguish between schools and districts. Districts exercise total control and are run by lawyers and businessmen. Schools are full of teachers who have no influence over those decisions (most of whom, by the way, would agree with you completely about the loss of alternatives and the homogenization of education).
Districts are institutions. Schools are politicized, and institutions - which include districts - homogenize the curriculum.
Lost in this debate about unions is that the majority of the bloat in district budgets can be attributed to the compensation accorded, and infrastructure that supports, the lawyers and businessmen who pose as administrators. That's where cuts should be focused, but because those lawyers and businessmen can grease the right political wheels a lot easier than a bunch of disparate educators, their role in the gouging of taxpayers goes unnoticed (or, perhaps more precisely, unreported).
Politicized schools and institutions that homogenize curriculum and sacrifice alternatives to the status quo for political expediency.
Now you hit a pet peeve of mine. Schools don't homogenize curriculum. Schools don't have any say about curriculum. One thing that I wish people would do is distinguish between schools and districts. Districts exercise total control and are run by lawyers and businessmen. Schools are full of teachers who have no influence over those decisions (most of whom, by the way, would agree with you completely about the loss of alternatives and the homogenization of education).
Districts are institutions. Schools are politicized, and institutions - which include districts - homogenize the curriculum.
Lost in this debate about unions is that the majority of the bloat in district budgets can be attributed to the compensation accorded, and infrastructure that supports, the lawyers and businessmen who pose as administrators. That's where cuts should be focused, but because those lawyers and businessmen can grease the right political wheels a lot easier than a bunch of disparate educators, their role in the gouging of taxpayers goes unnoticed (or, perhaps more precisely, unreported).
I can live with those statements.
Quote:
McParadigm: what are your thoughts on "last-in, first-out" layoff policies?
I see little in the way to justify them. I think stuff like that only gets pushed because teachers are paranoid that test scores are going to end up being used to determine firings, which would be no less ridiculous.
Actually, I think the issue has the potential to get a lot uglier. 50% of teachers in the field today are over the age of 50. An estimated 2 million teachers need to show up in the next ten years in order to fill those spots...based on the number of people entering the field in the last 5 years, indications are that colleges will produce about 700,000 teachers during that time. So right now we're burning the few people who are still showing up because we need to layoff some workers and they happen to be new, and it won't be long before the people we're saving are all calling it a day. An article just came out that pointed out that admissions into education colleges is plummeting, probably because it doesn't exactly look like a pleasant field to get into right now.
Protesters who marched at the home of Wisconsin state senator Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) were met with something of a surprise on Saturday. Mrs. Hopper appeared at the door and informed them that Sen. Hopper was no longer in residence at this address, but now lives in Madison, WI with his 25-year-old mistress.
Blogging Blue reports that the conservative Republican's much-younger new flame is currently employed as a lobbyist for right-wing advocacy group Persuasion Partners, Inc., but was previously a state senate staffer who worked on the Senate Economic Development Committee alongside Mr. Hopper. Her bio has been scrubbed from the Persuasion Partners' website, but a screen-grab is available here.
Sen. Hopper has worked closely with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to implement the state's new anti-labor laws and enact policies favorable to the interests of big business. Like Walker, Hopper is one of the Republican politiciansnamed in a massive recall effort spearheaded by Wisconsin Democrats.
According to Wisconsin law, state elected officials who have served at least one year of their current term are eligible for recall by voters. Hopper was elected state senator for district 18 in the fall of 2008, making him eligible for recall, whereas Governor Walker will not be eligible until 2012.
Blogging Blue also reports that Mrs. Hopper intends to sign the recall petition against her husband. The petition has already been signed by the family's maid.
Protesters who marched at the home of Wisconsin state senator Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) were met with something of a surprise on Saturday. Mrs. Hopper appeared at the door and informed them that Sen. Hopper was no longer in residence at this address, but now lives in Madison, WI with his 25-year-old mistress.
Blogging Blue reports that the conservative Republican's much-younger new flame is currently employed as a lobbyist for right-wing advocacy group Persuasion Partners, Inc., but was previously a state senate staffer who worked on the Senate Economic Development Committee alongside Mr. Hopper. Her bio has been scrubbed from the Persuasion Partners' website, but a screen-grab is available here.
Sen. Hopper has worked closely with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to implement the state's new anti-labor laws and enact policies favorable to the interests of big business. Like Walker, Hopper is one of the Republican politiciansnamed in a massive recall effort spearheaded by Wisconsin Democrats.
According to Wisconsin law, state elected officials who have served at least one year of their current term are eligible for recall by voters. Hopper was elected state senator for district 18 in the fall of 2008, making him eligible for recall, whereas Governor Walker will not be eligible until 2012.
Blogging Blue also reports that Mrs. Hopper intends to sign the recall petition against her husband. The petition has already been signed by the family's maid.
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:41 am Posts: 1123 Gender: Male
tyler wrote:
Where I live the teachers union is always pushing for two things; smaller class sizes and higher salaries. Meanwhile average tests scores are going down. In the private sector when you want a raise you normally show your boss why you are worth more, either by showing above average results (better test scores) or you are more productive (larger class sizes).
My parents work for a school system completely overrun by illegal immigrants in the past five years. These children refuse to learn English let alone learn Science and Math. Do you think it's fair that such teachers should be penalized for having low test scores and wanting to deal with less students?
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:02 am Posts: 91597 Location: Sector 7-G
Cameronia wrote:
tyler wrote:
Where I live the teachers union is always pushing for two things; smaller class sizes and higher salaries. Meanwhile average tests scores are going down. In the private sector when you want a raise you normally show your boss why you are worth more, either by showing above average results (better test scores) or you are more productive (larger class sizes).
My parents work for a school system completely overrun by illegal immigrants in the past five years. These children refuse to learn English let alone learn Science and Math. Do you think it's fair that such teachers should be penalized for having low test scores and wanting to deal with less students?
This is my problem with test score based compensation for teachers.
_________________ It takes a big man to make a threat on the internet.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:47 am Posts: 46000 Location: Reasonville
Cameronia wrote:
tyler wrote:
Where I live the teachers union is always pushing for two things; smaller class sizes and higher salaries. Meanwhile average tests scores are going down. In the private sector when you want a raise you normally show your boss why you are worth more, either by showing above average results (better test scores) or you are more productive (larger class sizes).
My parents work for a school system completely overrun by illegal immigrants in the past five years. These children refuse to learn English let alone learn Science and Math. Do you think it's fair that such teachers should be penalized for having low test scores and wanting to deal with less students?
Teachers just love to complain, don't they?
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am Posts: 22978 Gender: Male
Skitch Patterson wrote:
Michigan has a "consumer protection" law that requires EVERY ITEM in a store have an individual price tag on it. The only thing really excluded is stuff you pay for based on weight (produce, meat, etc). Each can of soup in the grocery has to have a little tag on it that says $0.49, every bolt at the local hardware store. everything. Michigan is the only state with this law (mass. has it at groceries only, from what ive read). So the governor proposes getting rid of this law, as it wastes a shit ton of labor, and money. So people go nuts, talking about how every store is just going to gouge them, and they need to know how much something costs, etc. Keep in mind 48 other states get by just fine.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
