If you could control education in the US... [Archive]

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 12:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously our education system sucks for the most part... If you were in control of everything, what changes would you make? (Other than an extra half hour for recess!)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm voting for political forum on this one.

But if I could control it, the thing I would do is take control of it away from the govt. Govt education is nothing more than a wonderfully efficient brainwashing machine.

Everyone will not sit quietly at attention and listen to the appointed government representative at the front of the room...

If all the government was interested in was universal education, they would simply issue vouchers to everyone to go to private schools so that obviously isn't the only purpose.

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 12:59 PM

Actually, the fact that most people have attended public schools in the US for 12 years, and will also have children who will attend these same schools gives people a lot of information and passion about the issue.

Paluka

02-07-2005, 01:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Actually, the fact that most people have attended public schools in the US for 12 years, and will also have children who will attend these same schools gives people a lot of information and passion about the issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this was what required to know how to fix education it would be fixed already.

istewart

02-07-2005, 01:04 PM

No AA. Period.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously our education system sucks for the most part...

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious?

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:06 PM

OK, so people can't have opinions on things unless they are part of the machine that they are discussing?

No one's saying we're gonna have all the answers, but things totally suck the way they are right now.

Duke

02-07-2005, 01:07 PM

I wouldn't have kids study arithmetic for 8 years. If you don't "get it" after 2 then you'll never be much good at it anyhow.

I'd change it from brainwashing kids to being mindless citizens to actually teaching them something.

Anyone who said that they wanted to either be a lawyer or a salesman would be expelled.

I'd basically change it from a "how to interact with society" training ground to an actual institution of learning.

~D

Paluka

02-07-2005, 01:15 PM

The problem with public education is that I'm not sure what it is supposed to do. Is it a) making learning possible for kids that want to learn or is it b) change the attitude of kids that don't want to learn right now This country's problem is b). Almost nobody cares about education. Rich white kids, poor black kids. Doesn't make a difference.

Duke

02-07-2005, 01:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with public education is that I'm not sure what it is supposed to do. Is it a) making learning possible for kids that want to learn or is it b) change the attitude of kids that don't want to learn right now

[/ QUOTE ]

c) induce a sense of nationalism in the kids, and prepare them for assimilation into the rest of society.

I doubt that learning, other than a rudimentary attempt to get kids to be able to read STOP signs and ballots, is part of the goal at all.

~D

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously our education system sucks for the most part...

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you would simply say "I wouldn't change anything BeerMoney, I would keep things just the way they are."

fnord_too

02-07-2005, 01:27 PM

I don't think our education systems sucks, per se. If you compare us to most of the world, we are pretty damn good. If you compare us to the G7 or such, I don't know how we stack up.

I think the biggest improvement we could make is in getting better teachers (or better training the teachers we have). There are plenty of great teachers in the K-12 area, but there are also a lot of crappy and mediocre ones.

One interesting idea that at first glance I hated was segregating classes by sex. You have the same teachers, same ciricculum, but the classes are unisexual. This has been tried with some success. The theory for why it's successful is that the social impact of having boys and girls in the same classroom is disruptive to learning. (Note, that lunch and stuff like that are not segregated in the cases I heard of, just the classroom). I would like to see more numbers on this, but it is an interesting notion.

Most of the thoughts I have about education pertain to giving the above average students a better environment to grow and learn in. These, however, would not have the biggest impact on the education system since: 1. above average students tend to do ok anyway (just maybe not as well as they could) and 2. most students are not above average. I don't think that things that would help above average students would necessarily help average students.

That last paragraph is just a long winded way of saying I am in the group of people who are unqualified to have an informed oppinion on the subject. (Unfortunately, I think that also applies to many withing the school system, too.)

fnord_too

02-07-2005, 01:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously our education system sucks for the most part...

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you would simply say "I wouldn't change anything BeerMoney, I would keep things just the way they are."

[/ QUOTE ]

Saying something does not suck and saying you would not change it are two different things. My poker game does not suck, but I spend a lot of effort trying to improve it.

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 01:31 PM

I think we need to start basing teachers' pay on merit instead of tenure.

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 01:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think we need to start basing teachers' pay on merit instead of tenure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Merit as measured by........?

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think our education systems sucks, per se. If you compare us to most of the world, we are pretty damn good. If you compare us to the G7 or such, I don't know how we stack up.

I think the biggest improvement we could make is in getting better teachers (or better training the teachers we have). There are plenty of great teachers in the K-12 area, but there are also a lot of crappy and mediocre ones.

One interesting idea that at first glance I hated was segregating classes by sex. You have the same teachers, same ciricculum, but the classes are unisexual. This has been tried with some success. The theory for why it's successful is that the social impact of having boys and girls in the same classroom is disruptive to learning. (Note, that lunch and stuff like that are not segregated in the cases I heard of, just the classroom). I would like to see more numbers on this, but it is an interesting notion.

Most of the thoughts I have about education pertain to giving the above average students a better environment to grow and learn in. These, however, would not have the biggest impact on the education system since: 1. above average students tend to do ok anyway (just maybe not as well as they could) and 2. most students are not above average. I don't think that things that would help above average students would necessarily help average students.

That last paragraph is just a long winded way of saying I am in the group of people who are unqualified to have an informed oppinion on the subject. (Unfortunately, I think that also applies to many withing the school system, too.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Some good points.. I am not interested in segregation.. Because "separate but equal" has been attempted.

I really think our system spends a lot of time on trying to educate those who can't/refuse to learn, while it overlooks its exceptional students.......

Look at all of the posters in here who say they hate school, yet have scored 1550 on SAT's, etc....

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think we need to start basing teachers' pay on merit instead of tenure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or, how about stop paying phys. ed teachers the same as Chemistry teachers?

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 01:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we need to start basing teachers' pay on merit instead of tenure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Merit as measured by........?

[/ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

pokerjo22

02-07-2005, 01:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Govt education is nothing more than a wonderfully efficient brainwashing machine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, our higher education institutions are famous for their agreement with the Bush administration. Just full of right-wing neo-con Christian fundamentalists.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:39 PM

Those are the only two possibilites: Suck or keep it exactly the same?

You suck. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

[/ QUOTE ]

As measured by...
who has the smartest kids?
some test (so teachers teach to the test)?

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 01:43 PM

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Look at all of the posters in here who say they hate school, yet have scored 1550 on SAT's

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like our system should then strive to have more people hate school.

Ask anybody, they'll tell you "I turned out alright, but the system itself doesn't work."

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Those are the only two possibilites: Suck or keep it exactly the same?

You suck. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the personal attack.

Make an argument for why you like our education system.. Why just make some nitpicky "let's not take your statement with a grain of salt" statement? I would agree, we do well in our attempt to educate everyone, encourage diversity, etc.. But, you have to admit, overall, the system needs changing.

I will tell you my experience..

In elementary school, I think i learned a good amount, even in JHS as well..

However, in HS, I had many teachers who didn't teach a thing. We would go into class, and play paper football, or just sit and talk........ And, I went to a better school. I can't imagine what is going on in some of the crappier schools. These teachers got paid the same as my math teachers who were challenging me from day to day the way a teacher is supposed to.

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 01:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

[/ QUOTE ]

As measured by...
who has the smartest kids?
some test (so teachers teach to the test)?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not in the business of defining how to measure results for different professions and I must say I'm not a huge fan of standardized tests. That being said, there must be some way to measure results and I find it incredibly stupid to pay a person a ton of money just because he's been around for a while. Even worse is when you can't fire someone who is obviously terrible just because he has tenure. Every other profession in America has figured out the best method for measuring the effectiveness of the employees in their specific field and I see no reason why teaching should be any different.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, our higher education institutions are famous for their agreement with the Bush administration. Just full of right-wing neo-con Christian fundamentalists.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not, but there are many assumptions that go unquestioned. For example, how many people in school have truly questioned whether our system of government is the best? That free-market economies work better than others? That free speech is a good thing? These all might very well be true, but they largely go unquestioned.

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:50 PM

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the personal attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Grow up (and that one was a personal attack, unlike the last one which was obviously a joke.)

[ QUOTE ]
But, you have to admit, overall, the system needs changing.

[/ QUOTE ]

It needs tweaking. I don't think it needs a major overhaul. We are very successful at education everyone. The fringes at the top and bottom get less out of the system, but for the most part it works very well.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 01:52 PM

I'm not asking for specifics, in general how do you think you could fairly pay according to results? (Note that this is different than paying different disciplines of teachers differently - i.e. math more than p.e.)

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 01:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not in the business of defining how to measure results for different professions and I must say I'm not a huge fan of standardized tests. That being said, there must be some way to measure results and I find it incredibly stupid to pay a person a ton of money just because he's been around for a while. Every other profession in America has figured out the best method for measuring the effectiveness of the employees in their specific field and I see no reason why teaching should be any different.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your premise. But the teaching "profession" is primarily employed by the government. The government's definition of "effectiveness" is rarely a good one for anything. There are so many constitiuents to please on this issue there will never be a consensus on what "results" entails. So it's doomed to mediocrity. This is only part of the reason I think we should get rid of government-run schools.

ddollevoet

02-07-2005, 01:55 PM

Want results? Privatize all schools.

If the schools do not provide a satisfactory level of education, parents would send their kids to another school. Bad schools become insolvent. Good schools thrive.

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 01:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not asking for specifics, in general how do you think you could fairly pay according to results? (Note that this is different than paying different disciplines of teachers differently - i.e. math more than p.e.)

[/ QUOTE ]

How about of you had assessors RANDOMLY drop in on teachers to see what they're doing that day?

Teachers generally go unwatched. Most professions don't have this luxury. If you asked teachers to agree to this, they'd say no........ But, of course they'd rather go unwatched than watched, wouldn't you?

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 02:01 PM

And assess them on what? Ultimately if you want merit based pay you have to define what the merits are and how you will rate them.

[ QUOTE ]
Teachers generally go unwatched. Most professions don't have this luxury.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I disagree that teachers go unwatched. They are watched by the administrative staff, their colleagues, by their students, and by the parents of the students.

Second, I would suggest that most professionals are not watched to the degree you are suggesting. That's part of what differentiates a professional from other jobs.

El Barto

02-07-2005, 02:05 PM

The number one thing we can do in the early grades is STOP using the Whole Language method of teaching reading. Its use is the number one reason so many children are not reading up to their grade level especially in economically disadvantaged areas.

Learn More Here (http://www.halcyon.org/wholelan.html)

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
And assess them on what? Ultimately if you want merit based pay you have to define what the merits are and how you will rate them.

[ QUOTE ]
Teachers generally go unwatched. Most professions don't have this luxury.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I disagree that teachers go unwatched. They are watched by the administrative staff, their colleagues, by their students, and by the parents of the students.

Second, I would suggest that most professionals are not watched to the degree you are suggesting. That's part of what differentiates a professional from other jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again with the nitpicking, maybe professional wasn't exactly the correct term.. but again, i think you knew what i was saying.

I am a teacher, and i have very little supervision over me. There are others with the same title as me who do nothing to challenge their students. They give the same exact test as a practice test. They teach for 1/2 the class.. They are given the same pay as i am.

So, where in most jobs, you may not have a supervisor watching over you like at McDonalds, there is at least someone there to see if you are AT LEAST DOING YOUR WORK.

As far as ASSESSING the teachers goes...... Do they have a well laid out lesson plan? Are they assigning HWK? Are students actively participating? Or, whatever measures these people decide are important and the teachers are aware of.

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 02:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The number one thing we can do in the early grades is STOP using the Whole Language method of teaching reading. Its use is the number one reason so many children are not reading up to their grade level especially in economically disadvantaged areas.

Learn More Here (http://www.halcyon.org/wholelan.html)

[/ QUOTE ]

I was a BigBrother to a kid who could not read. He was 11 years old, and no one was trying the phonics approach.. It truly frustrated me. What a disaster.

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 02:13 PM

My knee-jerk reaction is to say privatize. I have very little knowledge about the public school system though. What are the arguments for/against this?

GoT

LaggyLou

02-07-2005, 02:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]

If you were in control of everything, what changes would you make?

[/ QUOTE ]

There needs to be some system to identify the truly gifted students. You know, those with 140+ IQ's and 1450+ SATs. Those students could then be given an early introduction to poker, so that they don't have to go through the time and hassle of graduating from high school only to get to college and find that all of the other 19-year-olds are boring to someone with their intellectual prowess.

turnipmonster

02-07-2005, 02:31 PM

I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.

--turnipmonster

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 02:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.
--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]

What the heck does that mean?

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 02:33 PM

I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.

Would this mean incrasing taxation for public education significantly?

GoT

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 02:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]
This is definitely a good start. However, you have to make sure you're not just throwing money at it. If you just up the pay in the same system, you'll have the same results (maybe marginally better due to attracting 'better' people) but with a higher bill. They have to be good - pay them on merit and pay them well.

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 02:36 PM

FWIW, I went to private schools growing up and my instructors were paid ~the same as public school teachers, and in some cases less. The quality of education was just not even comprabale though. I don't think throwing money at the problem is the solution.

GoT

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 02:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.

Would this mean incrasing taxation for public education significantly? GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably not if they started using all the public education funding efficiently. Yea. Good luck with that. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

BeerMoney

02-07-2005, 02:41 PM

turnipmonster

02-07-2005, 02:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The quality of education was just not even comprabale though.

[/ QUOTE ]

just out of curiousity, how do you know? I don't necessarily disagree, but the quality of education in public schools varies quite radically depending on the region.

--turnipmonster

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 02:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I went to private schools growing up and my instructors were paid ~the same as public school teachers, and in some cases less. The quality of education was just not even comprabale though. I don't think throwing money at the problem is the solution.

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this GOT. What do you think made your education better? That is, I'm not asking you to quantify it being better, but how did it get to that point.. What was the motivation/ method for delivering a better product.

[/ QUOTE ]
His private school was probably able to make better HR decisions and hire/fire/pay/promote based on merit.

turnipmonster

02-07-2005, 02:53 PM

so, in some states/areas public school teachers get paid well. in other areas, they don't. I would make an effort to establish some sort of base standard of pay across the board, so that phds in ny aren't making 90k and phds in nc 35k (those aren't exact figures).

at my old high school, it's very hard for them to get and keep computer science teachers. the reason is the pay is terrible in NC public schools, and there is not really a lot of incentive for someone capable of teaching CS to enter in that profession. the pay is terrible, the raises small, and it's a very stressful job.

--turnipmonster

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 02:53 PM

I agree with this GOT. What do you think made your education better? That is, I'm not asking you to quantify it being better, but how did it get to that point.. What was the motivation/ method for delivering a better product.

Basically because the students/parents didn't have to choose to enroll there. If the quality sunk or wasn't up to par with the price compared to other private schools and the quality/price being offered there, then people would leave. So it was in their best interest to seek out and recruit solid instructors who got the results and to give high quality for a competitive price because otherwise they'd lose their customers. That's the main reason why I would think privatization would be a good solution.

As an aside, I think my parents making the financial sacrifice to send me to a private school was probably the second best single thing they ever did for me (the first being adopting me). The private sector just does an insanely better job than the gov't does. It's not even close. I guess I can only speak for WA state, but I would guess that statement would apply across the whole country.

GoT

Cornell Fiji

02-07-2005, 02:57 PM

I think that one of the myriad of factors that drives our suboptimal educational system is definitely the teachers and their wages etc. The curriculum also needs to be altered and there are other issues in there as well that need to be changed.

In New Jersey, and I believe almost every other state (although I am not sure of this) the Teachers Association (evil union) has handcuffed the state government into accepting a contract that includes tenure. Tenure is the one of the biggest reasons that our educational system is not what it should be.

In New Jersey teachers are pobationary for their first two years on the job. As a probationary hire a teacher does not recieve the full benefits of membership in the teachers union, mainly they are subject to employment at will, meaning that they can be fired for poor performance.

Once the third year begins however the teacher CAN NEVER BE FIRED without just cause (ie hitting a kid, coming to work under the influence, or forgetting that evolution is only a 'theory' in Southern states.) This means that a teacher can not be fired because they are bad at what they do, in fact if there is a really bad teacher who begins her third year of service in your school district she might be there for the next fifty years.

Furthermore, the teachers union's collective bargaining agreement is set up so that their salary is based SOLELY on the basis of seniority. Every year that they stay with the school they are given a standard increase regardless of their abilities, motivation, or performance.

Human nature is to be selfish and to only do things that benefit ourselves in some way. The primary motivation for teachers is their salary and benefits, although some are intrinsically motivated by the feeling that they get from helping a student. Because of the teachers union, wages and benefits are gauranteed and no longer can be used as an incentive. Therefore the only incentive for a teacher to work hard is an intrinsic desire to help others. Unfortunately, this desire often wears off after a few years thus leaving many teachers unmotivated.

The current educational system now has teachers in their first two years who are inspired to do a good job (so that they can reach tenure and slack off) and older teachers who simply don't care anymore. In my oppinion that the job security and wages/benefits gauranteed by the teachers union that in turn decrease incentives for teachers to do a good job which in turn decrease their motivation is one of the main reasons that our educational system is not up to par.

-Steve

Sponger15SB

02-07-2005, 02:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we need to start basing teachers' pay on merit instead of tenure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Merit as measured by........?

[/ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

[/ QUOTE ]

My mom has been a vice principal & principal as well as taught for 25 years, and we've talked about this and both realize that it will never ever ever ever happen.

This is seriously fantasy talk.

jakethebake

02-07-2005, 03:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
so, in some states/areas public school teachers get paid well. in other areas, they don't. I would make an effort to establish some sort of base standard of pay across the board, so that phds in ny aren't making 90k and phds in nc 35k (those aren't exact figures).

at my old high school, it's very hard for them to get and keep computer science teachers. the reason is the pay is terrible in NC public schools, and there is not really a lot of incentive for someone capable of teaching CS to enter in that profession. the pay is terrible, the raises small, and it's a very stressful job.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the best idea yet! Put even more power over education in the hands of the federal government! Aside from this, how is mandating equal pay for all teachers "competitive"? And "stressful"? I hope you're kidding. Compared to playing poker from home?...perhaps. Compared to most jobs that pay more?...not.

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 03:02 PM

just out of curiousity, how do you know?

I went to public schools up until mid elementary, and there was immediately a huge difference when I switched. I had friends from several different public schools through middle school and high school, and judging from their experience I would say the difference only gets larger the further up you go, i.e. tracks in private schools escalate their students' education faster than public school tracks do, widening the gap even further the further along you get. I knew kids in different private schools than mine as well and the trend was the same in their schools.

I don't necessarily disagree, but the quality of education in public schools varies quite radically depending on the region.

I'm sure that's true to some degree and I made that caveat in my other post.

GoT

turnipmonster

02-07-2005, 03:04 PM

currently, our public school system isn't a free market system where wages can be determined by consumer demand. all I am saying is that if they pay teachers better, they will probably get better teachers. how do go about doing that, I am not sure of.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 03:06 PM

Paluka

02-07-2005, 03:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that how good the principal/superintendent/whoever thinks the teacher is. This is how the real world works. We hire someone in a management position whose job it is to evaluate teachers. We don't use some crappy testing to get some bull#&$ "results". If you don't trust the administrator to judge who the good teachers are, then you fire that person and find someone you do trust.
My wife was a high school teacher up until last year, and from everything I've learned from her it seems like people in the school knew who the good teachers were. But they can't pay the good teachers any more money, and firing the bad teachers is impossible.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 03:08 PM

Whether it will happen is a different question than whether it should happen.

Cornell Fiji

02-07-2005, 03:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
currently, our public school system isn't a free market system where wages can be determined by consumer demand. all I am saying is that if they pay teachers better, they will probably get better teachers. how do go about doing that, I am not sure of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although paying teachers more would be nice I think you used the perfect word here. We need to pay our teachers "better" meaning that we pay them for merit and not tenure. Unfortunately that is absolutely impossible given the current laws that we have protecting unions and the rights of union members. As long as there are unions there will always be seniority based pay and as long as there is seniority based pay performance will not matter and whenever performance doesn't matter teachers will have no incentive to do a better job. So in short, were fuked until we can change the laws that protect unions.

-Steve

CCass

02-07-2005, 03:12 PM

1. Make parents be more involved. (don't ask me how to do this)

2. Get the teachers unions out of the discussion

FWIW, my wife has been a public school teacher for 15 years, so I have a fairly unique view of our educational system (my wife would disagree with my 2nd point, BTW)

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 03:17 PM

How do you think your private school would have fared if they were constitutionally required (as public schools usually are, depending on the state's constitution) to provide an education to ALL kids --- not just the ones whose parents chose to spend the extra money to send them to a public school? They have to educate people from all economic and social levels, they have to educate people from all intelligence levels, they have to educate people whose parents don't care about education, they have to educate people with special needs, etc.

Why would they have to do any of this stuff if education went private? Why would they be not be allowed the right to refuse service? It wouldn't be a gov't run or funded operation anymore, so the gov't wouldn't choose the curriculum anymore.

not just the ones whose parents chose to spend the extra money to send them to a public school

It would still cost money.

They have to educate people from all economic and social levels, they have to educate people from all intelligence levels, they have to educate people whose parents don't care about education, they have to educate people with special needs, etc.

They already do all of this.

GoT

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 03:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why would they have to do any of this stuff if education went private?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because in most states there is a constitutional requirement that the government provide a public education.

[ QUOTE ]
They already do all of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Private schools (largely) don't. Most comparisons between current private and public schools don't take this into account. For example, you mentioned that your private school was better than the public school that you had previously attended (and the ones that your friends attended.) I would be willing to bet that your private school didn't have the same burdens that the public school has because they don't have the same constitutional obligations that the public schools have.

HDPM

02-07-2005, 03:28 PM

I am not sure I would want to control education in our country, but I would like to improve it. One thing that could be done to improve the schools OVERALL is to eliminate federal funding of any educational program below the college level. The vast majority of public school funding comes from state and local taxes, but the federal government has been steadily increasing the control of schools through funding. If there were no federal funds, states and their political subdivisions would still fund education and might just be able to fund more since their citizens would have some more money. (Assuming the fed gov't didn't continue to take the money) Without federal control however, each state would be free to experiment with the various ideas tossed out in this thread. Vouchers, charter schools, merit pay, whatever.

This is no panacea, and there are still problems with state governments and education. Big problems. But it would at least create a little better market. States or local districts that paid more would get better teachers. Maybe one state will figre out better distance learning that would allow great teachers to help more kids. So maybe a great teacher could make 150K in one state and other states would have to compete. Parents could also exercise their right to travel interstate to get their kids in better schools. To some extent this happens now and creates inequality among states and among districts within a state. They are problems to be sure, but they are more easily managed at the state level.

Another way to look at it is this. Education cannot be controlled very well at any level. But the smaller the management unit, the easier it is to address the kids' needs. The fundamental unit for this is the family, because each parent is responsible for their child's education. To be sure, many parents fail in this responsibility. But the bigger the management unit the tougher things get to control. It is easier for one dedicated parent and one school to provide for education than it is for a school district, a state, or the federal government. Keeping things smaller and more maneuverable is preferable to a one size fits all centralized system.

In an ideal world, there would be separation of government and education, but that is a long way off. Until then, the smaller the better when it comes to gov't involvement I think.

jokerthief

02-07-2005, 03:28 PM

1. Focus more on English, Math, and Science.

2. Teach foriegn language in elementary school as a way of strengthening students understanding of english grammer.

3. Make logic classes part of core curriculum in 7th or 8th grade.

4. Make economics part of core curriculum in 10th grade. I think 3 econ classes should be mandatory, taught in this order: Micro Theory, Macro Theory, and then Pratical Application.

5. One year mandatory personal finance class. This would be a class where students would learn about the real costs of credit, priciples of compound interest, tax exempt programs and the effect of taxes on investment, stock market priciples with emphasis on index and mutual funds, the effects of commisions and fees on investment, the risk of bonds, the risk of ill-liquid assets, real estate with traditional credit financing and note financing with analysis of property tax cost and risk, and most importanly the time value of money.

GuyOnTilt

02-07-2005, 03:31 PM

Because in most states there is a constitutional requirement that the government provide a public education.

Isn't that what we're talking about? Getting rid of that and privatizing education?

I would be willing to bet that your private school didn't have the same burdens that the public school has because they don't have the same constitutional obligations that the public schools have.

I don't know enough to say you're wrong here. Depending on what those obligations are (I don't know), I might agree with you.

Are you suggesting that if the school system were privatized, current private schools would no longer have the freedoms they do now and that everything would basically turn into current public schools with all the gov't restrictions and obligations, but with a cost to the families? If so, that's not what I'm talking about. I realize there's reasons why private schools provide better education, and that a lot of that might have to do with the rules and restrictions public schools currently have to deal with. So why not get rid of the gov't's involvement in our children's education and go to the private sector?

Note: I'm not necessarily a proponent of this; I'm really just asking. I haven't researched this so I don't know the ramifications or what this would require.

GoT

fnord_too

02-07-2005, 03:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I went to private schools growing up and my instructors were paid ~the same as public school teachers, and in some cases less. The quality of education was just not even comprabale though. I don't think throwing money at the problem is the solution.

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you basing this comparison on if you have never gone to public school? I went to both, and I don't feel like I could say that private was better or worse than public. I went private 1-8. For 6,7,8 I lived in Louisville, which had supposedly bad public schools (didn't go to them, so I have no first hand knowldge). 9-12 I went to public school in VA. Here are some random thoughts:

I pretty much just learned on my own in each. I suppose some of the lectures were educational, but there was no real challenge in either.

In 7-8, I was in a very small class (like 16 people). In math, we would have a pre test before studying a section, and if you aced the pre test, you didn't have to do the work. After acing several (this was all pre algebra stuff), the teacher just gave me a different book and told me to go off and work on my own. I know a couple of people who were studying calc in fifth grade, but in the private school I went to even getting very basic algebra instruction wasn't possible.

I went for about a month or two to private high school before we moved back to VA. They had an entrance test and placed you in classes based on your scores (which was good). Their placement was flawed though, because the placed you in classes based on your overall score. That is, I was in the second of like 5 tiers, so all my classes were the second tier classes even though I got every question on the math portion of the test correct (so I should have been in the top math classes and second or third in the humanities). Still, at least they were trying to get people into the classes most suited for them.

In public high school, my advisor was just awful. I was in something akin to remedial english and very basic math when I started. I pretty much coasted through the whole four years.

I know a lot of people from Northern VA who went to a gifted math and science HS. I remember taking a grad level Gallois Theory class in college, and a 16 year old kid from this HS sitting in one class (he was touring the campus). He didn't know the material we were covering, but he knew enough to not be totally lost. Here was a 16 year old kid who basically had the equivalent of a BS in math coming out of high school. Kind of hard to say that his public education was lacking.

I think a lot of the burden of education falls on the student and their parents, but neither is necessarily knowledgable about optimum learning strategies, so the learning facilities really need to pony up some expertise and competence.

Gainsay

02-07-2005, 03:55 PM

Privatization really isn't a viable solution. What happens to the kids enrolled at the private schools who turn out not to be up to snuff? Best case, they have parents that care and they get moved to another school after some number of months.

The worst case actually happened in California at the start of this school where a system of charter schools went bankrupt at the beginning of the year and left all the kids high and dry.

Also, the Department of Education released a report recently that basically detailed that charter schools really are doing very comparable (maybe even slightly worse) than public schools. In both cases, some of the schools are good and some of them suck. If your parents care, you can probably get a good education, if they don't, you might wind up screwed.

Finally, I think everybody has skipped over the most obvious idea which is that the school year should be longer. I remember reading that the US has a much shorter school year than other industrialized nations. In most places the length of the school year is based on an agrarian society where the kids had to help out on the farm in the summer. This sort of 19th century model isn't so good for getting a 21st century education.

turnipmonster

02-07-2005, 04:03 PM

teachers in NC don't have a union (nc is a very anti-union state) and pay is still based on seniority. I mostly agree about unions, but they are not solely to blame here.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 04:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that if the school system were privatized, current private schools would no longer have the freedoms they do now and that everything would basically turn into current public schools with all the gov't restrictions and obligations, but with a cost to the families?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess it depends on what your proposal is. Do you think a there is/should be a right to an education? If not, go ahead and fully privatize. The immediate impact of that would be that the poor would stop being educated.

If by "privatization" you mean that there is competition for education dollars among various schools, but that there is still a constitutional right to a "public" education (i.e. funded by public dollars but education purchased at private institutions) I think you will find that the private institutions will have just as much of a difficult time dealing with the diverse student populace as our public schools do.

elwoodblues

02-07-2005, 04:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Also, the Department of Education released a report recently that basically detailed that charter schools really are doing very comparable

[/ QUOTE ]

There is almost always a Hawthorne Effect where kids in new programs outperform until the "newness" wears off.

Reef

02-07-2005, 04:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously our education system sucks for the most part...

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious?

[/ QUOTE ]

how is it not?

MikeNaked

02-07-2005, 04:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]

That's the best idea yet! Put even more power over education in the hands of the federal government! Aside from this, how is mandating equal pay for all teachers "competitive"? And "stressful"? I hope you're kidding. Compared to playing poker from home?...perhaps. Compared to most jobs that pay more?...not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet another post where you show yourself as foolish/clueless. I am a high school teacher that is given the responsibility of insuring that 200 kids are at a specific benchmark at the end of the year in reading/writing. THAT, my friend, is stressful. Especially given that every student learns differently, has different experiences with the subject matter, has differing levels of support at home, etc. etc.... Not to mention the lack of resources for our growing immigrant and special ed populations.

While I agree that accountability is lacking in education (I would LOVE merit-based pay and would do away with tenure), any teacher with any shred of conscience is stressed.

I suspect that you would meltdown in less than a week in a ninth-grade classroom.

Patrick del Poker Grande

02-07-2005, 04:23 PM

I agree that doing some level of customization is important. I was lucky enough to be in a school district that believed in letting the advanced kids get ahead and giving focused help to those who were falling behind. My elementary school had an advanced english class where about 12 of us were taken to another room during English time and we were taught at whatever pace we could go. The result was that when I took their test for how fast a kid could read, I ran out of words to read before the testing time was done and we had actually pretty good reading discussion for 8-12 year old kids. I skipped 4th grade math, so when I was in 6th grade, they had me going to the junior high during first period for algebra classes and then they bussed me back to the elementary school for the rest of the day. They would have sent me to the local college to take calculus classes past the AP calc class offered at high school, but by that time I had skipped 8th grade and my other subjects 'caught up' to math, so I essentially was just getting out of high school a year early instead of 1/8th of a year early (if you can think of it that way). I did have a friend who was taking college calc classes his senior year, though. They also offered several AP classes which were great. On top of that, they did a cool thing with senior year AP social studies and english where they basically took the two and instead of making them each one year-long class, they made them a half year long each but for two periods. They made you 'apply' for the class and get an okay from the teachers who taught it in order to get in. The class was conducted much more like a college class - there were two days of lecture, one day where your group of about 5-6 students met with the teacher for deeper instruction and discussion, and two days where you were free to use the time as you wish - you're free to spend the time in the library or sleeping in if you want and coming to school for 3rd period if you choose. You were given work that they expected you to get done in this time, though, so it's not it was just study hall. There were very high expectations of everyone's work and it was an excellent curriculum.

My little sister had a speech impediment when she was a kid and she has a bit of a learning disability. she got the individual attention she needed to overcome her speech problems and extra attention to help her learn the way she needed to learn.

My schools also had programs for those at the other end of the spectrum. They realized that everyone wasn't going to college, so they had classes and work programs to show those who weren't going to college how to prepare for the 'real world' and make a living with a high school diploma. She's currently working her way through college to be a special ed teacher.

From 7th grade (6th for me since I was taking that one class at the junior high), every student was assigned a counselor that they could get advice and help from on any topic they needed help with. They were there to help you pick your classes and make sure you were going the right direction and they were there for you if you just needed someone to ask for any other kind of help - kids are picking on you or you don't like your teacher or any of the other 2967439674397 things you have going on when you're a kid.

All this was done in a public school of pretty good size ~2000 students in 9th-12th grade. These things CAN be done in a public school - you just need the right people and an environment where people don't get their head chopped off for sticking out their nose a little.

rusty JEDI

02-07-2005, 08:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with this GOT. What do you think made your education better? That is, I'm not asking you to quantify it being better, but how did it get to that point.. What was the motivation/ method for delivering a better product.

[/ QUOTE ]

Private school education is better because the school gets to choose who they take. A student is a constant behavioural problem and they are not allowed back. Even worse, a student doesnt perform well academically and they are not allowed back next year. Of course not all private schools act this way, but many do.

Secondly they do better because of parent interest. At a public school the students whose parents actually show an interest in their kids education like going to parent/teacher interviews and checking their kids homework are way ahead of the students who dont have this parental involvement.

Thirdly it may not be better at all, but it gets reported from students as being better. Private schools do an excellent job in promoting a sense of community and a feeling of belonging and pride in their school.

rJ

rusty JEDI

02-07-2005, 08:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How do you think your private school would have fared if they were constitutionally required (as public schools usually are, depending on the state's constitution) to provide an education to ALL kids --- not just the ones whose parents chose to spend the extra money to send them to a public school? They have to educate people from all economic and social levels, they have to educate people from all intelligence levels, they have to educate people whose parents don't care about education, they have to educate people with special needs, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

BINGO

rJ

fimbulwinter

02-07-2005, 09:28 PM

yay smif!
fim

Wayfare

02-07-2005, 10:29 PM

good thing that nationalism is probably the most destructive force in human history.

Jman28

02-07-2005, 10:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Results? That's the way you get ahead in any other profession - get results.

[/ QUOTE ]

As measured by...
who has the smartest kids?
some test (so teachers teach to the test)?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not in the business of defining how to measure results for different professions and I must say I'm not a huge fan of standardized tests. That being said, there must be some way to measure results and I find it incredibly stupid to pay a person a ton of money just because he's been around for a while. Even worse is when you can't fire someone who is obviously terrible just because he has tenure. Every other profession in America has figured out the best method for measuring the effectiveness of the employees in their specific field and I see no reason why teaching should be any different.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have a voucher system. Then student go to the school of their choice (and parents choice). The schools with the best teachers get more money, and the schools with bad teachers go out of bussiness. Then, the schools pay the best teachers the most money and bad teachers don't have jobs.

You guys should read 'School Choice and Social Justice' by Harry Brighouse.

I guess it's good (only book I've read on the subject so far). I'm taking a class on this right now, so I may have more to say in a few weeks. We just started.

-Jman28

rusty JEDI

02-07-2005, 11:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I guess it's good (only book I've read on the subject so far). I'm taking a class on this right now, so I may have more to say in a few weeks. We just started.

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]

Im taking middle school education now. Last semester was the class on Social Justice. Basically summed up its white man hater class.

rJ

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The number one thing we can do in the early grades is STOP using the Whole Language method of teaching reading. Its use is the number one reason so many children are not reading up to their grade level especially in economically disadvantaged areas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Teaching methods come and go all the time. This is definately not the number one problem with the schools.

Even if there was some miracle learn to read system, most of the kids that can't read now probably still wouldn't learn because they just don't care. And even if they did all learn the school system would likely still suck.

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I would pay teachers nationwide a competitive salary.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to break it to you but most teachers really don't get paid that badly. My wife is a teacher and makes decent money for the area, my aunt and uncle are teachers and make good money as well.

I'm sure inner city teacher probably don't get paid enough, but on average teachers get paid pretty well (certainly not great, but not the nothing people like to claim they do) considering they only work about 200 days/year.

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
so, in some states/areas public school teachers get paid well. in other areas, they don't. I would make an effort to establish some sort of base standard of pay across the board, so that phds in ny aren't making 90k and phds in nc 35k (those aren't exact figures).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it costs a LOT more to live in NY than NC.
[ QUOTE ]

at my old high school, it's very hard for them to get and keep computer science teachers. the reason is the pay is terrible in NC public schools, and there is not really a lot of incentive for someone capable of teaching CS to enter in that profession. the pay is terrible, the raises small, and it's a very stressful job.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sort of a bad example because CS majors tend to get relatively high paying jobs and schools systems are pretty much stuck with having to pay all their teachers relatively the same. It would be hard for them to give the CS guy 50k and an english teacher 35k just because the CS guy can go get a tech job somewhere.

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]

1. Make parents be more involved. (don't ask me how to do this)

[/ QUOTE ]

Ding ding ding.

As an aside, it always bothers me when I hear someone try and compare home schooled kids with public school educated kids by comparing test scroes and various things. It is completely ludacris to compare a group of kids whose parents obviously have an interest in how their kids are doing since they are taking the time to sit down and actually serve as the teacher with the whole sample of public school kids very many of which give the least effort possible to pass (or less) becasue their parents often don't give a crap about school.

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
1. Focus more on English, Math, and Science.

[/ QUOTE ]

As opposed to what? All those pesky art/culture type classes?

Nottom

02-08-2005, 12:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
teachers in NC don't have a union (nc is a very anti-union state) and pay is still based on seniority. I mostly agree about unions, but they are not solely to blame here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am about 97% sure they do. I went to school in NC from 4-8th grade and remember my teachers going on strike when I was in Jr High.

I think what is confusing you is that in most southers states there are "right to work" laws which means you don't have to belong to a union like you do in most northern states.

captZEEbo1

02-08-2005, 05:43 AM

stop the no child left behind act like whoa. worst idea ever.

jakethebake

02-08-2005, 08:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yet another post where you show yourself as foolish/clueless. I am a high school teacher that is given the responsibility of insuring that 200 kids are at a specific benchmark at the end of the year in reading/writing. THAT, my friend, is stressful. Especially given that every student learns differently, has different experiences with the subject matter, has differing levels of support at home, etc. etc.... Not to mention the lack of resources for our growing immigrant and special ed populations.

While I agree that accountability is lacking in education (I would LOVE merit-based pay and would do away with tenure), any teacher with any shred of conscience is stressed.

I suspect that you would meltdown in less than a week in a ninth-grade classroom.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what teachers go through. My mother was a teacher in the public school system. The lack of resources, etc. was why she finally left. I've also known other teachers, and most are pretty relaxed. Different things stress out different people I guess. I don't know your personality, so I can't talk about your personal stress triggers. But I also know that job has nowhere near the stress of my job. I'd love to put you in charge of making actual decisions on hundreds of millions of $$$, numerous major decisions a day, with the consequences of wrong decisions and see how stressed you get. Or running your own business, where you work 80 hour weeks and have to make your own marketing and financial decisions that will either cause your business to thrive or tank. It's not close.

Edit: I'm not syaing teaching is an unimportant job. It's one of the most important jobs there is. And yes, most of the people doing it aren't qualified. I'm just arguing the level of stress here.