Read the rest, as I try to explain the statement. We have to decide if we want public schools to be as restrictive.
You're back-tracking. I pointed out three very important differences (small class sizes, intolerance of bad behavior and greater parental involvement) between public and private schools. You specifically said that these differences may not be particularly desirable. And basically, the second difference (intolerance of bad behavior) is the only difference which is based on restriction, and you support such restriction. You keep bringing up private schools as restrictive without every backing it up.
Because of freedom and money. Smaller classrooms cost. You have to have more teachers, maybe more schools, and it costs.
And what is your point? I know they cost more, but what is your point? I don't believe you to be one who is against higher funding for education. This is where we may agree. I support greater funding for education if we can ensure there's an element of choice in the system. If that means increasing the general taxpayer funding for education, then so be it. If parents can choose, I'm all for it.
We ahv eparents that will never really care. Do we abandon the children? It's an option. But we do have to decide.
No, we do not abandon the children. I think I've mentioned to you before that if the parent is unwilling to make a decision, the child may be given the arbitrary power to choose their own learning institution.
And it isn't schools that perfomr poorly, it's the population of students that perfom poorly.
Another wrong statement. We can take two samples of student populations, with nearly identical backgrounds and even of the same neighborhood, and come up with incredibly different performance rates. The Compton story has made such a comparison with students of other schools. We can also find independent schools in the same inner-city neighborhood who are doing far better than the public schools. The children come from virtually the same exact background and yet they're doing better in the private school. Again, your statements sound like you're just absolving all public schools of any accountability.
It is quite possible the instruction is sound, the effort great, and the population lacking. As no one has really assessed the reasons why a population scored poorly, you're making a leap in assuming it to be the school's failing.
When the comparisons and studies indicate that such schools are failing, why deny it? When teachers allow disruptive students to remain disruptive (in other words, they have no control over the classroom), they're exhibiting signs of a bad teacher. When they come to class with a magazine and give the kids busy work, they're bad teachers. When administrators lose money over ridiculous programs and wasteful spending, they're exhibiting signs of bad administrators. When you put the two together, you have a failing school.
Again, cost is but one way to discriminate.
I've already responded to the cost discrimination of private schools. Respond to my point rather than just regurgitate what you've already said. Otherwise, I'm wasting my time debating a broken record player.
Some discriminate based on ability or prepardness.
Where is your evidence that the majority or even a significant portion of private schools do just that. Also, define "preparedness."
Others on family or connections.
That's a first. Evidence please.
Thepoint is they can be choosey.
Yes, they can, and so can parents. The major difference is diversity. There's a wide range of schools in the private sector that offer different things to different students. The point is that students, given enough time and enough freedom, will be able to find the school that suits their learning pursuits the best.
And keep in mind different countries have a different social outlook on education. In otherwords, their parents, their peers, everythign aropund them approaches education differently than here.
Do you realize that you're making the claim that our students and our parents are culturally inferior (or socially inferior if you prefer) as opposed to European students and parents?
You can't do a direct comparison.
Why not? They've already made such a direct comparison. You take the exact same math or science questions (or you could even issue a subjective test on civics, history and reading/writing) and you issue them to two samples of students, one from the states and one from a European class. Both have to be relatively the same in regards to performance relative to their own country. I've seen one such study that compared the test results of one classroom from one of the best performing schools in New Jersey versus the test results of one classroom from one of the best performing schools in a province of Denmark. The test questions were identical. Guess who scored higher? There are numerous such studies comparing relatively similar classrooms in the U.S. to those in Japan, Korea, and other parts of Europe. There is no question that we, as a nation, are lagging far behind in math and science. I imagine it is true for the soft sciences as well, given that foreigners know more about our own history than we do.
Abstain? I thought we were talking about disruptive students?
Yes, you said you support the repeal of truancy laws and if disruptive students remain disruptive, they ought to be permanently removed. The repeal of truancy laws naturally means that parents and students have a right to refrain from education, altogether.
And it isn't resort. Public by definition means public. Private by definition means private. It seems very simple to me.
Yes, it is quite simple. The terms 'freedom to choose' and 'open enrollment' are quite simple as well.
Because private isn't really better than public. It is often actually more expensive.
Wrong. Public schools pay an average of 12K per pupil per year. Private schools pay a fraction of the cost and they perform better.
And if you change those rules, you make private public, and at the end of the day, we've only made one the other and fixed or improved nothing. Pasisng the problem on doesn't fix it.
I don't think that is a far assessment of my proposal. If you don't wish to change the rules and deregulate public education, then be prepared to tolerate overcrowded classrooms and sub-par education standards.
Not shifting, never shifting, but recognizing the limitations of the teachers, and how the focus is too narrao when it is only on the teacher, and therefore, ineffective.
Is the teacher ever wrong or incompetent, in your opinion? Provide a scenario, if you don't mind.
And no, I wouldn't make it a friend, if that is what you mean by closest. Someone who knows something about your subject and job would be valid.
Oh, I understand. Status-quo once again. Currently, a colleague of the same department (whom therefore has a substantial relationship with the evaluated teacher) is doing the evaluation. You wish to change...nothing?
Why? Different country with diferent student populations and social views of education.
You actually think American parents, as a whole, care less about education? Again, comparisons of remarkably similar student populations have already been considered. Our students are no dumber than the European students. We're all human, after all.
I don't know near enough about thier situations. It isn't like different countries compare directly, or that we really want them to.
Could you clarify the last part of this statement?
Again, it isn't the school, as if it were a person, it is the population that goes there and all the factors involved with the school.
I'm left with the opinion, the system is fine, the people are stupid.
Tests that require thought and ability to use all you've learned. The worst type of tests are standaized bubble tests. They tell us very little. A good test takes time, and isn't gradable in a machine.
I agree that bubble tests are not the best to determine the performance of learning. But the really good tests are ones based on math and the hard sciences. In those fields, there is no subjective grading. I'm personally a history major and I know first-hand that essays based on historical analysis are graded entirely on the subjective views and standards of each individual professor.
Possible? I think most of us believe anything is possible, but that doesn't make it likely. We have to look at the factors. A non caring parent isn't like to what is needed to move.
Are you REALLY a teacher? I hope the subject you teach is not English, no offense intended.
Nor is there any evidence any statistacly significant number of students would benefit. It is more likely for those who benefit, others will be hurt.
Again, pure speculation without regard to any evidence. Those who leave the public schools for an alternative education benefit. And those who remain are at least left with a smaller class size and a greater teacher-student ratio. It also improves the less-than-adequate public school by forcing them to account for their methods and their funding. They have to. Best Buy doesn't continue to exist and expand because they waste money and they don't provide adequate service. In the marketplace, it's quite the opposite.
A better approach seem to me to try and improve public educations (which isn't really completely broke btw).
I never said it was broke, I said we've doubled the amount spent per pupil over the past twenty years (adjusted for inflation) while improvement rates have flat lined. And apparently, your only solution to improve public education is to repeal truancy laws. That is not enough, in my opinion. But I do agree with such an opinion.
As the poll showed, most believe thier school is doing well. It's others who are not. Kind of like when people hear a lot of negative talk and they just accpet that it is negative. Few actually study or look into any of this, nor would I expect most to.
You are patronizing the parents. The parents who care know how well their school is performing. They look at the homework and the type of material and/or curriculum served at the school and they know, based on a rough estimate from their own past and background, whether or not such material is adequate for their children.
Whether most would or not is a question mark. A number, whatever the number is, will simple see a maybe and try it. Others wil mistakenly think they are getting something they aren't. Others won't be able to move as a child can't do it on their own, and will be left with what is left.
Again, PURE speculation. None of which is enough to deny the right of parents and children to choose the education of their choice.