• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

why I think schools are worse now

A_Wise_Fool

Active member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
377
Reaction score
53
Location
Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
All of your above post has proved my point. The current and former education system wasnt intended to educate, it was to create "good workers". Ones that would never challange the authority of their "superiors".
Then why are the standards lowering? It doesn't matter how applicable to the business world the education system is at all. The status of the business world has no bearing on how well a kindergardener learns the ABCs, how an 8th grader writes a paper, or how a highschool senior places on the SATs. They once could adhere to a higher standard and now they can't. Why?

What is this supposed connection between a "good worker" of 50 years ago and a "good worker" today, in a world consumed by information technology, that makes kids score lower on the same, or even lesser, tests? You suggest a cause and effect relationship as to why students are doing poorly but I don't see one. All you seem to do is say there is a problem that was once not here (lowered standards), and when it wasn't here X was different, so changing of X must be the cause.
 

SFLRN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
95
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Are you implying that we need highly qualified math professors to teach algebra and trig to high school students?
No, we need math teachers who understand algebra and trig. Far too many teachers in math simply write formulas and do not thoroughly explain the logic behind these things. From my personal experience, the best math teachers are the ones that can do this, the ones that understand the logic behind the math. That is achieved by when prospective math teachers take some of the more rigorous mathematics courses in college.
Well, we don't. If you know how to do it, and how to teach it, a math teacher who can do calculus is more than enough for anything taught in public schools. Some school districts are playing the game of "highly qualified" teachers to make it appear that they care about providing a good education to the public. Fact is, they like to drive out the more qualified teachers who have been working longer in the profession so they can hire in newer, younger, lower paid teachers. My wife was given $80K to retire early!
In math especially, being an experienced teacher doesn't mean you're a teacher that can captivate young adults with mathematics. Anecdotally, the best math teachers I have had have been relatively young. There is only a limited correlation between years of teaching and how talented you are in the trade.

The number of hours worked has been seriously
understated here by some. Try teaching language arts, for example. Grading papers in that subject is a lot more time consuming than grading a simple test.
It isn't that demanding. You have to read papers with a limited amount analysis. Once again, the hours are nowhere near that of the more demanding fields in business or law. Considering that teachers receive two months off of the year (plus other breaks) that would likely makeup for any possible extra hours they work compared to the general populace.

Pay in some areas is pretty good, after 20 years on the job. The real issue is starting pay. It is criminal, IMHO, to expect someone to start at $32K for a job that consists of managing the behaviour of 30 plus kids while trying to teach them at the same time. They earn the time off, trust me on that. My wife, mother-in-law, son, and a niece are all teachers. There is stress on the job, expecially when you have to teach a bunch of ill mannered brats who don't want to be there and the parents and administration won't do their part in making the system better.
Some teachers suck, some are excellent, most are in the middle, just like any other profession. And most of us non-teachers don't have what it takes to do the job.
How about we start a thread why Investment bankers should be paid less?
After all, they are mostly a bunch of greedy, selfish, money grubbers who will eventually be put in prision for fraud, right?
So how many I-bankers do you actually know, or even know through a friend? I would not contend that all teachers are lazy or that there aren't some who go above and beyond, yet I do believe that the current system does not encourage the majority of teachers to go above and beyond.
The above generalization about I-bankers is incorrect. Smearing I-bankers is petty at best. Simply because they make more out of undergrad than most people will make in a lifetime does not mean they're all evil. The individuals who do land a job in I-banking often work very hard to get into the schools that are recruited for I-Banking positions (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, NYU (Stern), Stanford, UPenn, and a few other select schools). Then they have to work to maintain a high (at least a 3.5) GPA at those competitive universities. Even with all of that there is no guarantee that they'll even land a position in I-banking. A teacher doesn't need to work even close to that hard to land a job. The teacher will also not work anywhere near the hours entry-level analysts work (100 hours a week). Therefore, there is no reason they should even be paid close to what I-Bankers make (180,000-250,000 out of undergraduate). If there were teachers that did indeed work this hard then I would prefer a system that rewards them for that rather than the current system that rewards teachers for holding a position for a number of years.
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
8,145
Location
Venice Beach, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The lowering of the academic standards clearly illustrates the education system's goal isnt primarily to do just that, educate.

You have to have a vivid understand of school politics. This is something that people who unaware of will deny, but any teacher will and should agree with my next statement.

The schools budget is dictated almost entirely towards attendance. I know for a fact this is the case in Chicago, Northwest Indiana, and Florida. It comes in the form of.....

The % of students attended/total student enrollment = total school budget. So if the school budget for 1 year was $1million dollars, and the attendance rate was 50%, than the school would be allocated only $500k. It is actually more complicated than that, in which schools receive money per student per day.

The moral of the story is, school budget policy dictates all. Those who said anything about money not being an issue with education are completely full of **** from the stance that money is primarily given to schools who's students are attending.

It is proven in this current educational system that students that show up every day will do better than students that dont show up every day. That is again because the curriculum dictates to that goal. They are pushed towards repetitive task constantly. This same "routine" is not displayed in colleges. Yet these are the same high schools in which many claim to get you ready for college.

How does a magnet program that operates within the framework of a structurally motivated guideline prepare a student for college.

When the entire point of college is to take out the bullshit that was put inside our heads. Not fill it with meaningless mindless structure.

They lower the standards to keep students in school. Keep the standards low, and a curriculum dependent on attendance.

One things for certain, the programs they implement are not in the best interest of educating the youth.
 

doughgirl

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
1,619
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
“Come on now, you cant possible believe (hopefully) that the education standards are what is bringing down American education. If you do, than your motivated by some type of special interests. Or just plain faulty logic…”

What is faulty about it?


“How does a student in the "info age" prosper from an education system that was structured and designed on taking people from rural areas and turning them into good factory workers with meaningless mindless structure??? I'd love to hear this response…”

Information age?……Yes, kids need computers and calculators today because they can’t find information or figure out basic math problems on their own without them. Can they identify most countries on a world map? Do they know how their own government works? I am saying that children that were educated 40 years ago got a better all around education than our kids do today. Just because you might work in a factory does not mean that you can't or shouldn’t be educated and know what is happening around the world.

‘Since i am a current college student (although not first year), i can answer that honestly. High school did absolutely nothing to prepare me for college. Nothing!!!”

Why do you think this is true? You received a dumb downed education and were not prepared? Why were you not prepared?


“Nobody cares if you don’t come to class. You don’t have to ask certain things like, "can i leave the room?" Punctuality is less important, because it is the student who misses out. There is much more of an emphasis on out of class studying, and in my experience we have never had in class time to work on assignments.”

Why should they? You should care about going to class. You should be responsible enough to make the effort. If you are in college then you are old enough to get to class on your own. You shouldn’t have time in class to work on assignments. That is the time for teaching.

“Bottom line, the education system is stuck in another time period. There is no need to fix the problem, they need to remove the problem and start from scratch…”
What time period? And what do you think should be done?



Comments about the article…….

"How does that system fit into a world where assembly lines have gone away?
Toffler said, “How does that system fit into a world where assembly lines have gone away?”
Assembly lines might have gone away but deadlines have not, ask any newspaper reporter. We live in a competitive world and if you can’t keep up your in trouble.


“The public school system is designed to produce a workforce for an economy that will not be there. And therefore, with all the best intentions in the world, we're stealing the kids' future.”
I am talking about a good basic education. Being able to read, write and calculate, knowing world history.... science. I am talking about challenging students and setting high goals, expecting MORE not less. Everyone deserves an education like this.

“When I was a student, I went through all the same rote repetitive stuff that kids go through today. And I did lousy in any number of things. The only thing I ever did any good in was English. It's what I love. You need to find out what each student loves. If you want kids to really learn, they've got to love something. For example, kids may love sports. If I were putting together a school, I might create a course, or a group of courses, on sports. But that would include the business of sports, the culture of sports, the history of sports -- and once you get into the history of sports, you then get into history more broadly.”

Rote stuff is good sometimes. He did good in English and you can make a living using English skills. But what about the kids who did poorly in English? What if 90% of the school excelled in sports. Are there that many jobs that could employ this many graduates in sports? Kids have to have the basic knowledge to do many jobs, because statistics will show that people change jobs over the years. English is important because there aren’t that many jobs that do not require comprehending manuals and articles.

“It's open twenty-four hours a day. Different kids arrive at different times. They don't all come at the same time, like an army. …..They don't just ring the bells at the same time. They're different kids. They have different potentials. ….. I would have nonteachers working with teachers in that school, I would have the kids coming and going at different times that make sense for them.”
Is this economical? And what if all the kids wanted to come at night? You think parents who work 9-5 are going to wake up and take little Eddie to class at 2AM? And what teachers that have families will do the same? And non-teachers teaching? No standards, no degrees?
Do we have school buses that work 24 hours a day? Do we have cheerleading practice at 1 in the morning? Football practice at 12 midnight? Its not feasible.

“Maybe it's important for teachers to quit for three or four years and go do something else and come back. They'll come back with better ideas. They'll come back with ideas about how the outside world works…”
And how will they support themselves? How many people can take a hiatus and not work for three years?
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Goldenboy219

It is called ADA (Average Daily Attendence) and of course that is how they get their budgets...it is a big deal to keep accurate records about student. Do you propose that they don't get their budgets this way or that they don't care about attendence?

ADA has NOTHING to do with curriculum. If anything, the better the ADA the more money the school gets and the better the supplies (art stuff, computers, overheads, etc) that the teacher gets to help teach.

There are no "lower standards". Where are you pulling that one out of? Standards are pretty high if you would look at the California Content Standards, for instance: http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/

College is totally different than high school. Sounds like you are there now and that may explain your dislike for high school...separation. You are transitioning into a free thinking adult and working some of this **** out. People dislike high school because they are young adults that want more freedom and then you get it in college. After college you will see another transition and difference.

Mandating that teachers get up and lecture is a horrible idea, not that you said it but you implied it by making your comparison. My worst teachers were my college professors. All nine years of University. Horrible. They couldn't teach jack ****. They sure as hell knew a lot of stuff though. Even in labs...most profs didn't teach to learning styles or anything half as complicated as what most high school teachers do.

High school students that are on track and are motivated ARE prepared for college. I was. Just about every one of my friends was too. The issue is not those that are motivated, it is what to do to motivate or take care of those that don't understand what an education can do for a person. But that is the whole issue now, isn't it? They don't understand what good an education is so perhaps forcing them to try and get one is the wrong goal.

The programs that they implement are not in the best interest of educating the youth? What? I went through SIOP training and SDAIE training to name just two and each was about 3 months long and each spent its entire focus on the best ways to implement programs that would benifit the youth. I was in the norm here and it bothers me to see people lash out at what they do not fully understand. Keep trucking and get back to me on this....

Bodi
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
8,145
Location
Venice Beach, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Maybe just maybe, ADA should be subsituted for something along the lines of actual educational progress.

Instead, many people have stated standards are lowered, in wake of soaring attendance policies.

Soaring attendance-lower standards

Soaring attendance-lower standards

Soaring attendance-lower standards

Sounds like we just solved the problem. Why arent higher standards emphasized???

Oh wait, i got it, because of school budget bureaucracy bullshit.

Also, i am sorry for your University professors inability to make you interested. Although i cant say i suffer the same short comings. Point of view is everything...
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Are you trying to repitition me into your opinion? LOL! :lol:

Is that the type of education that you had...brainwashing? Haha I understand your frustration now. kidding...I'm only kidding.

At least provide some level of evidence. Examples. Links. Personal experience.

ADA is INDEPENDENT of "actual educational progress". Don't you realize this? You are muddling the two issues, thus convoluting the matter.

At ALL of the schools that I have worked at...Attendence was never once "soaring" and all of our objective standards regarding curriculum were high and ultimately raised periodically. This is first hand experience and it is the same story that I hear from educators WORLD WIDE.

Also, I didn't say that they didn't make me interested. I said that "They couldn't teach jack ****" but that "They sure as hell knew a lot of stuff though" That being said...they didn't make me interested. Nobody "makes" you anything. I was interested on my own accord. The point of the whole thing was that the college profs weren't as good at TEACHING as high school teachers. They don't have decent TEACHING SKILLS. They just know a lot about their field and they DICTATE...one of the WORST forms teaching there is.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Utah Bill

Fact is, they like to drive out the more qualified teachers who have been working longer in the profession so they can hire in newer, younger, lower paid teachers. My wife was given $80K to retire early! This is a major issue. An argument can be made for change, since I know many older teachers that are good but are very resistant to changing their ways and adusting to the changes that administrators are trying to implement in order to adjust with societal issues


Pay in some areas is pretty good, after 20 years on the job. The real issue is starting pay. It is criminal, IMHO, to expect someone to start at $32K for a job that consists of managing the behaviour of 30 plus kids while trying to teach them at the same time. Yeah…if a teacher can deal with the difficult task of “dealing with kids” then the rest is really pretty easy. The difficulty IMO isn’t really the starting pay…how much pay does a 23 year old really need considering within ten years they will be making 60K or more? Gotta tall you though that I was making $51K after three years of teaching and I started at $44K…so not all teachers start out with low salaries.

The issue IMO is the “tenure” system. Districts can string along qualified teachers year after year with one year contracts since there are not any “tenured” positions available. I left teaching in California for this reason. No job security at all. They earn the time off, trust me on that. My wife, mother-in-law, son, and a niece are all teachers. There is stress on the job, expecially when you have to teach a bunch of ill mannered brats who don't want to be there and the parents and administration won't do their part in making the system better. I agree with that part. Disrespect…Cell phones…I Pods…etc etc are rampant. IF a teacher can understand how to handle kids, then they will do just fine. Teaching is just like parenting…structure and consistency.


[/B]
Administration making changes? The ones we have experienced in Idaho, Arizona, and Utah are the problems, not the problem solvers. In Idaho, the Superintendent fought the parents who wanted Kindergarten, saying we "don't want to make our children like Robots". He was a jock in his younger years and wanted funds for more athletic facilities, was against advanced classes in the junior high school as well.
Very few of the teachers in those and most western states have Tenure available to them, and very few are in a union. I suspect that is an issue in many states but not so much the west (excluding the left coast state of CA, and maybe OR).

My son has been teaching for over 10 years now in AZ, 8th grade Science, and has his masters degree. He is just barely getting close to $50K per year, but take a look at his benefits. The school district only offers insurance at reasonable cost to the teacher, to add his family is over $10K per year!
As for how much a 23 year old starting out NEEDS? Think about that one a bit. Are we telling them they have to wait until they have 10 years on the job to marry, have children? Do we apply the same logic to those young people in other professions?
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
No, we need math teachers who understand algebra and trig. Far too many teachers in math simply write formulas and do not thoroughly explain the logic behind these things. From my personal experience, the best math teachers are the ones that can do this, the ones that understand the logic behind the math. That is achieved by when prospective math teachers take some of the more rigorous mathematics courses in college.




It isn't that demanding. You have to read papers with a limited amount analysis. Once again, the hours are nowhere near that of the more demanding fields in business or law. Considering that teachers receive two months off of the year (plus other breaks) that would likely makeup for any possible extra hours they work compared to the general populace.

So how many I-bankers do you actually know, or even know through a friend? I would not contend that all teachers are lazy or that there aren't some who go above and beyond, yet I do believe that the current system does not encourage the majority of teachers to go above and beyond.
The above generalization about I-bankers is incorrect. Smearing I-bankers is petty at best. Simply because they make more out of undergrad than most people will make in a lifetime does not mean they're all evil. The individuals who do land a job in I-banking often work very hard to get into the schools that are recruited for I-Banking positions (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, NYU (Stern), Stanford, UPenn, and a few other select schools). Then they have to work to maintain a high (at least a 3.5) GPA at those competitive universities. Even with all of that there is no guarantee that they'll even land a position in I-banking. A teacher doesn't need to work even close to that hard to land a job. The teacher will also not work anywhere near the hours entry-level analysts work (100 hours a week). Therefore, there is no reason they should even be paid close to what I-Bankers make (180,000-250,000 out of undergraduate). If there were teachers that did indeed work this hard then I would prefer a system that rewards them for that rather than the current system that rewards teachers for holding a position for a number of years.
How many teachers do we need to do the job? Lots. How many investment bankers do we need? Very few. Which job is more important? BTW, look up the word SARCASM and apply that to my comment about bankers.
You want us to think that you are speaking with authority about teaching but you have none in the minds of those of us who have taught or are closely related to those who teach. Have you ever had to read 150 papers and grade them? Grading language arts papers is very time consuming compared to grading a math test.
As for math, I agree that a teacher who understands it can do a better job, but that doesn't mean that they can transfer that understanding to the student. My USN techical schools had better math teachers than the high school I attended, and those guys were non-degreed enlisteds doing the teaching. Theory and logic behind math is wonderful, to a person who wants to be a math major, but mostly a waste of time to those of us who just want to be able to use it. First time I took calculus, the professor wasted lots of time on proofs, very little time on the application of it. If it wasn't for an engineer friend who helped me, I would have failed. The engineering classes that I took, if taught by an actual engineer, were a lot easier than those who were the theorists.
 

tristanrobin

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
66
Reaction score
18
Location
New Haven, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
They are not paid an exceptional amount of money because the craft has 1. a Large labor supply

What?! There is always a demand for more teachers!

2. Requires a limited amount of training

What?! My state requires an M.A. after working for three years with a B.A. Few professions require that. NOt prefer it. Require it.

3. Works for 2/3rds of the year.

And gets PAID for 2/3rds of the year. Many of us choose to have our paychecks spread out over the entire year. But, we are NOT paid for summer vacations. That's why so many teachers have summer jobs.

and 4. Does not work that many hours close (compared to the most lucrative fields)

What?! Most teachers arrive 1/2hour to 1 hour before school begins. Then work the 8 hour school day. Then work for an additional 1-2 hours after school is let out. Then take home a load of papers to grade and lessons to plan.

5. There have been a number of restrictions on pay implemented by administrations bending to union lobbying.

If it weren't for the lobby, teachers would still be making $50 a month with room and board.


Primary and secondary teachers will also never garner the salaries of I-bankers and Corporate Lawyers because they do not endure nearly as much stress, work as many hours, or in the case of law, have to seek three more years of intense education.
No stress??? :rofl No offense - but are you for real?
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
8,145
Location
Venice Beach, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Are you trying to repitition me into your opinion? LOL! :lol:

Is that the type of education that you had...brainwashing? Haha I understand your frustration now. kidding...I'm only kidding.

At least provide some level of evidence. Examples. Links. Personal experience.

ADA is INDEPENDENT of "actual educational progress". Don't you realize this? You are muddling the two issues, thus convoluting the matter.

At ALL of the schools that I have worked at...Attendence was never once "soaring" and all of our objective standards regarding curriculum were high and ultimately raised periodically. This is first hand experience and it is the same story that I hear from educators WORLD WIDE.
I was using repetition as a play on words relating to the subject :mrgreen:

It was never my argument that education standards were being lowered, that was about 4 other peoples. I just provided a direct relation.

1.) The flawed curriculum is founded on the idea that those who attend every day do better.

2.) The better a schools attendance, the more money they get.

3.) Education standards (in the US) have been lowered

I went to a South Florida Magnet school that was to prepare you for business. It really wasnt a bad school. They had to enact an automatic failure if a student was to miss more than 5 day in 1 semister. Automatic failure.

The results: The school's attendance policy increased from under 70% to 91%. I dont know this for sure, but i would be willing to bet the 9% who didnt show up failed (kinda makes sense).

Couple this with the fact that only 55% of Florida students in the class of 2000 actually graduated (this date correlates with my above statement) and there you see the problem.

If it wasnt about teachers/administrators jobs (dirt bag union *******s), than why is funding take precedent over education results??? Instead of firing administration, they fire teachers. Although i do agree parents are much to blame, school administration needs to share much more of it...
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Utah Bill

Administration making changes? Yes. Administration changes. Not BAD administration changes...just aministration changes.The ones we have experienced in Idaho, Arizona, and Utah are the problems, not the problem solvers. That is one example. I too am a teacher and I worked in the Western States and know administrators and teachers in CA, AZ, OR, and Wash. I know and have heard of bad administrators. They exist. Lets move past the few horrible ones that exist and realize that they are the minority and not the rule. Most come in with solid ideas about how to adjust and they actually do care. You sound older and totally jaded. If you had nothing but bad experiences, that might be a problem...but then again, perhaps you and your wife are examples of older teachers and such that resist change?? I like you and have always respected your opinions, so don't take that as an insult. It is not. In Idaho, the Superintendent fought the parents who wanted Kindergarten, saying we "don't want to make our children like Robots". He was a jock in his younger years and wanted funds for more athletic facilities, was against advanced classes in the junior high school as well. That totally sucks and that guy should be fired and never hired again

Very few of the teachers in those and most western states have Tenure available to them, ver few NEW teachers in most western states have Tenure available to them. There are LOTS of tenured teachers thoughand very few are in a union. I would say that almost every single teacher that I know in all the states is in a union, but I was in CA as you are about to mention and I only know a few in ID and AZ. You have the experience there and it sounds like we taught in different worlds. I retract my jaded comment. You sound realistic just like I always thought. Obviously I am not editing this and just typing what I think as I read :2razz: I suspect that is an issue in many states but not so much the west (excluding the left coast state of CA, and maybe OR).

My son has been teaching for over 10 years now in AZ, 8th grade Science, and has his masters degree. He is just barely getting close to $50K per year, but take a look at his benefits. After three years teaching in CA with my Master at the high school level I was making $52K a year. Quite different. But cost of living and all of that might be a factor?The school district only offers insurance at reasonable cost to the teacher, to add his family is over $10K per year!Health insurance for teachers is a joke...but that is the government letting health care costs ream the people and teachers are just feeling it.
As for how much a 23 year old starting out NEEDS? Not muchThink about that one a bit. I have and this is a whole different story about what people THINK they need versus what they ACTUALLY need. Two parents at 30-40K each a year is PLENTY of money to start having kids and saving for their future house and education. Most wait a few years to find their spouse and then a year or so to get married and then most will wait a few years for kids anyway. Realistically, kids start appearing in the late twenties nowadays and that means that the parents had five years of $60K plus years to save and such. It is all how you look at it. My wife and I did it. We had two kids 18 months apart and it is working for usAre we telling them they have to wait until they have 10 years on the job to marry, have children? Do we apply the same logic to those young people in other professions?
Like I just pointed out they don't have to wait. We agree that there are huge problems in education nationwide...right? What is to be done about it then? I for one, left the country and am now in education in another country in the South Pacific because of many of the issues that we have outlined and because I don't see them getting better anytime soon... :)
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Golden Boy

The results: The school's attendance policy increased from under 70% to 91%. I dont know this for sure, but i would be willing to bet the 9% who didnt show up failed (kinda makes sense).

Couple this with the fact that only 55% of Florida students in the class of 2000 actually graduated (this date correlates with my above statement) and there you see the problem.
I wonder though...what was the graduation rate prior to the increase in Attendence? I bet it was below 55%. ;)
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Like I just pointed out they don't have to wait. We agree that there are huge problems in education nationwide...right? What is to be done about it then? I for one, left the country and am now in education in another country in the South Pacific because of many of the issues that we have outlined and because I don't see them getting better anytime soon... :)
Older and jaded? are you young and progressive? you can be old and progressive, and if you have been reading my posts you would know that I think the curriculum needs to be updated to match real careers available to the up and coming generations. My wife is not likely to have her teaching skills get old, the english language hasn't changed much (at least not for the better) in the last 40 years. Math doesn't change much either, not at the high school level. Adding something here, history as it is taught is a complete waste of time. It is so whitewashed and watered down that high school graduates know almost nothing of US history, much less world history.
As for starting pay, you are assuming that both parents work. IMHO, one of the parents should stay home with the children until they enter first grade. If that is old fashioned, so be it. Surely you can vouch for the idea that having a stay at home parent is better for their younger years. My wife started the same year our youngest started school, and still managed a 27 year teaching career.
The education system needs work, but the inertia that has to be overcome to get the changes started is probably overwhelming to most of those who could actually effect the changes. And then there is the problem of getting busy parents involved. Good luck on that!
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Utah Bill

Older and jaded? Quote By Bodi: "I retract my jaded comment" Maybe you missed that in my last post? are you young and progressive? YEs. Iwill be old and progressive too, as you undoubtedly are!you can be old and progressive, and if you have been reading my posts you would know that I think the curriculum needs to be updated to match real careers available to the up and coming generations. Curriculum in Math and English...Fine. History...Not Fine? Incorrect. I am a Social Science and Science teacher...double credential and the way I teach history is to NOT water it down BUT to get into the meat of the issues and make the kids think about all aspects of the issue and correlate it to other instances...past and future AND present. That is just part of. It is more dynamic than that so please don't put down what you are not understanding. History is where kids learn to actually think IMO and then relate it to real world experience Critical Thinking Analysis and such. Most kids don't realize what they learned until they get a bit older and Math and English are things that are not used in the REAL WORLD as often as Critical Thinking skills gained in History IMHO LOL! :lol: My wife is not likely to have her teaching skills get old, the english language hasn't changed much (at least not for the better) in the last 40 years. Math doesn't change much either, not at the high school level. Adding something here, history as it is taught is a complete waste of time. It is so whitewashed and watered down that high school graduates know almost nothing of US history, much less world history. ridiculous
As for starting pay, you are assuming that both parents work. No I am not. Didn't I say that we are doing it on my income alone? If not...we are.IMHO, one of the parents should stay home with the children until they enter first grade. If that is old fashioned, so be it. Surely you can vouch for the idea that having a stay at home parent is better for their younger years. that is what we do and it works just fineMy wife started the same year our youngest started school, and still managed a 27 year teaching career.
The education system needs work, but the inertia that has to be overcome to get the changes started is probably overwhelming to most of those who could actually effect the changes. And then there is the problem of getting busy parents involved. Good luck on that!
Yes...we agree that it needs a massive overhaul :2razz:
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Yes...we agree that it needs a massive overhaul :2razz:
Congratulations on being a good history teacher, but you have to know you are in the minority. My history teachers back in the early 60s were terrible, one was the football coach, he just had us read and then take quizzes. The ones my kids had were better but they had honors classes available to them. When I took college courses, that is when history became interesting and meaningful.
Ever watch the old TV series "Connections", by James Burke? I would like to see a course taught that uses that approach, how things happening at certain times had unexpected positive results, or consequences, later on. Names, date, places, facts are what most history teachers in high school stress now, with no meaning associated with the events of history. I would also go back to night class to take a course that disects our form of government from today working backwards to the founding fathers, then further back to where our founding fathers got their ideas (yes, the French!), and so on. How ideas get generated, nurtured, and expanded upon will do more for an understanding of the human experience than what our high school students get now.
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,717
Reaction score
8,145
Location
Venice Beach, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I wonder though...what was the graduation rate prior to the increase in Attendence? I bet it was below 55%. ;)
For what its worth, that was 1 school. I was giving the graduation rate of the state. Not every school implemented those same standards.

Not to mention your point is moot due to the fact that the education system caters to the attendance rate.

My junior and senior years were spent at a top notch school in Valparaiso Indiana. There attendance policy was unlike that of Northeast High School. They instead had a rate of 98%, had high graduation rates, and the same meaningless mindless structure. Most of my close friends will agree that there was a big academic shock with the transition from high school to college.

There was also a slashing incident if anyone remembers...
 

SFLRN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
95
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
How many teachers do we need to do the job? Lots. How many investment bankers do we need? Very few. Which job is more important? BTW, look up the word SARCASM and apply that to my comment about bankers.
How many people can be teachers? Lots. How many people can deal with the lifestyle and mental demands of I-banking or corporate law, few. Therefore, the pay is quite different because of a limited number of people who are qualified to work in the latter fields. That is not meant to suggest that teachers do not serve an important function. There is simply a larger supply of people who can do it. We need janitors, yet that does not mean they are paid exceptionally high salaries.

You want us to think that you are speaking with authority about teaching but you have none in the minds of those of us who have taught or are closely related to those who teach. Have you ever had to read 150 papers and grade them? Grading language arts papers is very time consuming compared to grading a math test.
Paper grading is more time consuming than mentally challenging. I never said I was an authority on the matter. I am simply saying that compared to other fields, using a standardized set of numbers, the field of teaching is less demanding. That does not mean it isn't demanding at all. It simply means that it is not as demanding.
As for math, I agree that a teacher who understands it can do a better job, but that doesn't mean that they can transfer that understanding to the student. My USN techical schools had better math teachers than the high school I attended, and those guys were non-degreed enlisteds doing the teaching. Theory and logic behind math is wonderful, to a person who wants to be a math major, but mostly a waste of time to those of us who just want to be able to use it. First time I took calculus, the professor wasted lots of time on proofs, very little time on the application of it. If it wasn't for an engineer friend who helped me, I would have failed. The engineering classes that I took, if taught by an actual engineer, were a lot easier than those who were the theorists.
However, the point of math isn't just to use it in real life. The teaching purpose is also to strengthen one's logical skills because math requires a degree of logical rigor not present in most other fields. I think a balance of both is needed in our schools, communication and understanding. I would agree that there are a number of theorists who fail to communicate their ideas effectively and that is an issue that needs to be addressed in some American Universities.
 

SFLRN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
95
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
No stress??? :rofl No offense - but are you for real?
I never said teachers face no stress, they just do not face the same amount of stress.
What?! There is always a demand for more teachers!
So does every teacher find a permanent job? No, there are plenty who have to go into very poor urban areas and very poorly paying rural areas. The exception is in math and the sciences.
What?! My state requires an M.A. after working for three years with a B.A. Few professions require that. NOt prefer it. Require it.
Your state may require that. However, that does not mean that most states require such certification.
And gets PAID for 2/3rds of the year. Many of us choose to have our paychecks spread out over the entire year. But, we are NOT paid for summer vacations. That's why so many teachers have summer jobs.
I was explaining that this is why teachers are not paid a large salary. They do not work as much as most other professions. I did not say that they were paid for a years worth of work.
What?! Most teachers arrive 1/2hour to 1 hour before school begins. Then work the 8 hour school day. Then work for an additional 1-2 hours after school is let out. Then take home a load of papers to grade and lessons to plan.
Do you have a more aggregate measure of how many hours most teachers work? I would contend that few of them ever work 100 hour weeks or even 80 hour weeks. I-Bankers and corporate lawyers do that consistently. There are exceptions, but in general teachers do not work near this amount.
If it weren't for the lobby, teachers would still be making $50 a month with room and board.
If teachers are always in demand then how would this be true?
One wonders, how does an Investment banker working 100 hours a week have time to post here?
I am not an investment banker. For the point of clarification.
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
SFLRN
I never said teachers face no stress, they just do not face the same amount of stress.
I just typed in "most stressful jobs" into google and this is what popped up. I don't see I-Banker or Corporate Law anywhere... ;)

Top 10 Most Stressful Jobs Top 10 Least Stressful Jobs
1. Inner City HS Teacher 1. Forester
2. Police Officer 2. Bookbinder
3. Miner 3. Telephone Line Worker
4. Air Traffic Controller 4. Toolmaker
5. Medical Intern 5. Millwright
6. Stockbroker 6. Repairperson
7. Journalist 7. Civil Engineer
8. Customer Service/
Complaint Worker
8. Therapist
9. Secretary 9. Natural Scientist
10. Waiter 10. Sales Representative

According to Health Magazine
Myths | CDC Ulcer


Top ten most stressful jobs in the UK based on physical and psychological stress, and job
dissatisfaction
(Source - *Source - Robertson Cooper 01/06/2004)

Physical health
1 Ambulance
2 Teachers
3 Social services, providing care
4 Customer services (call centre)
5 Bar staff
6 Prison officer
7 Management (private sector)
8 Clerical and admin
9 Police
10 Teaching assistant

Psychological health
1 Social services, providing care
2 Teachers
3 Fire brigade
4 Ambulance
5 Vets
6 Lecturers
7 Clerical and admin
8 Management (private sector)
9 Prison officer
10 Research (academic)
http://www.yourfavouriteshop.com/Catalog/Mind/whitenoise/distant-thunderstorm.htm


Is teaching the most stressful job?
BBC NEWS | UK | Education | Is teaching the most stressful job?


Teaching and social work are the most stressful jobs
Teaching and social work are the most stressful jobs


Britain's 20 most stressful jobs*
Whether you work in a hospital or classroom, office or factory, stress at work can be a very real experience. More and more of us are suffering from stress and stress-related illnesses, according to research.

Prison officer
Police
Social work
Teaching
Ambulance service
Nursing
Medicine
Fire fighting
Dentistry
Mining
Armed forces
Construction
Management
Acting
Journalism
Linguist
Film producer
Professional sport
Catering/hotel industry
Public transport
Stress and Work - Stress - 4Health from Channel 4


The world's most stressful professions
1. IT
2. Medicine/Caring Profession
3. Engineering
4. Sales and Marketing
5. Education
6. Finance
7. Human Resources
8. Operations
9. Production
10. Clerical
IT: the world's most stressful profession | The Register


The Most Stressful Jobs in America

- medicine,
- teaching,
- social services,
- customer service,
- fire rescue and
- law enforcement
The Most Stressful Jobs in America - Associated Content


Let's just end all of this, "the field of teaching is less demanding" crap right here. :lol:
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
tristanrobin
What?! My state requires an M.A. after working for three years with a B.A. Few professions require that. NOt prefer it. Require it.

SFLRN
Your state may require that. However, that does not mean that most states require such certification.
tristanrobin...California does not require this and California maintains some of the highest teacher qualification standards. You must have a B.A. with a Teacher Credential. What state do you live in because I literally find it impossible to believe that a teacher at any K-12 MUST have a Masters Degree in order to teach.

That being said...there are tons of shitty teachers with high qualifications. Qualifications don't mean anything about whether or not the individual can teach. This is the point I was making with Golden Boy about college professors. Most are “Academia” and can't teach.
 

SFLRN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
95
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So if we just take these studies at face value, is teaching more stressful than being in a combat zone? (being a soldier essentially).
I would like to point out that most of those studies are using somewhat faulty methods to analyze stress. Firstly, by determining levels of stress based off of reporting it is somewhat harder to make an objective statement on what field is more stressful than another. For example, some people who are more easily stressed out may also tend to go into certain fields. Likewise, some fields may be more likely to have people who have unrealistic expectations about their job. Therefore, those fields are more likely to have people who are blindsided by the reality of the job. To put this in perspective, "40% of workers reported their job was very or extremely stressful;" http://www.stress.org/job.htm. Does that mean that everyone has a job that is equally stressful? No, it simply means that a good number of people feel stressed. A person might feel stressed out as a waiter, yet if they were in a combat zone their stress would be considerably higher. There might be certain factors that contribute to stress more so than others that can be objectified and then evaluated. In and of itself, reporting is a limited measure of job stress. I would also point out that the jobs I specifically mentioned are much smaller than something as general as "Finance" or even "Law." It is unlikely that these specific sub-fields would have enough participants in these broad studies to give an accurate picture of their stress level.
In short, those studies cannot be used to describe the stress levels of I-Bankers and Corporate Lawyers because of faulty measuring methods and a lack of data from those specific jobs.
(In the event that what you say is true)
Apparently, teachers make one fourth of the starting salaries of corporate lawyers and I-bankers, yet they are still more stressed. Baffling.
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
92,759
Reaction score
19,803
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
It seems as if you have a justification for your statements...and if you don't now, you will seek one.

I hear you about "weaker" peoples...as you are attempting to portray some...dude, your language pattern analysis is easy to read.

By your logic...you are calling cops and ER Surgeons and others pussies just like you are calling teachers whiners...

sorry you can't understand what stresss actually entails...
 

t125eagle

Active member
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
384
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
tristanrobin...California does not require this and California maintains some of the highest teacher qualification standards. You must have a B.A. with a Teacher Credential. What state do you live in because I literally find it impossible to believe that a teacher at any K-12 MUST have a Masters Degree in order to teach.

That being said...there are tons of shitty teachers with high qualifications. Qualifications don't mean anything about whether or not the individual can teach. This is the point I was making with Golden Boy about college professors. Most are “Academia” and can't teach.
ive heard that NY is like that
 
Top Bottom