Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Apparently, some teachers would rather take a pay cut to work in a private school where they don't have to deal with the types of negative issues that public schools teachers must deal with.
Having taught good students and mediocre students. Not really 'bad' students in Asia paying for English lessons.
But, I'd take good students any day of the week and be paid much less for it. Teaching is a dream with motivated students.
Standing in front of a classroom of unmotivated, uninterested students is the biggest waste of time for all involved. (If they are bad students and motivated, again, as long as they are motivated - it's a dream to teach!)
Because of that, I'd be in complete favor of abolishing High School across America. Only people who want to study as teenagers, should study. Anyone who does not, should be able to get jobs at factories or fastfood or wherever it is they see themselves at age 15. There shouldn't be a negative stigma for not having a high school education.
I really believe those final 3-4 years of high school are just a very large waste of time for any student who doesn't want to be there. Teachers end up babysitting, kids aren't progressing in any form whatsoever, and real life is being delayed.
How great would that be for a kid to learn at 15 that studying pays off, and goes back to school fulltime at 15 1/2 with the motivation. Either that, or they become a construction worker at 15 and start earning real pay, and start their life. I'm sure plenty of kids would be happy with that, especially if they really have no desire whatsoever to be in school anymore.
We aren't doing anyone any favors by babysitting young adults for 3-4 years preventing them from participating and contributing to society.
True, Tiger Beer. When I was in high school <flinch> we had three levels of education - Basic, General, and Academic. Basic was mainly shop and labor-oriented classes as well as personal finance; General was training for more advanced (as in going after Associates' degrees or into bookKeeping, certified nursing assistants, etc); and Academic was for those who were going on to 4 year colleges/universities. Everyone who was involved could change, take more advanced (or less advanced) courses, depending on what they wanted out of life. Then politics got involved, everyone had to have a 'level playing field' - and the Basic kids were dragged into classes that bored them or they didn't understand, while the Academic kids were held back because the teachers had to spend so much more time with the kids who simply didn't want to be there. Now most of them are frustrated, angry, bored students who either can't keep up or can't wait to graduate and move on. Most teachers are frustrated with the subjects they HAVE to teach no matter what students they have; they can't separate the Academics and teach them to critically analyze Shakespeare when they are spending all of their time trying to teach basic grammar to the Basics in the same classes.
The politicians said that they did it so that the 'lesser students' wouldn't feel "stigmatized". Balderdash. They did it to enforce the nannyism that they promote and demand, and that parents, busy with their own lives, give in and allow.
The problem is not the motivated student with motivated parents. The problem is the non-motivated student with parents who have no interest.
And it appears clear that money alone won't solve the problem. See DC and urban New Jersey.
Note that does not suggest money is not a factor. There is a correlation between low expenditures and bad results.
Would a low socio-economic kid thrive in the silicon valley school? Is there some equivalent that might work? Note that there is huge payback to the society if the cycle of poverty is broken....
... Would a low socio-economic kid thrive in the silicon valley school? Is there some equivalent that might work? Note that there is huge payback to the society if the cycle of poverty is broken....
When my daughter was in 8th grade, I spent time asking questions of principals and faculty of several private high schools and the local public high school she could go to if she were to switch to public school. I was just performing some due diligence prior to deciding which high school my daughter would attend.
The local public high school is academically quite good every measure. I asked "Why is this school so good wile the one on the other side of town so bad?" The answer was telling.
"Our success," said the various faculty & administrators with whom I spoke, "has little to do with our faculty or administration or funding level. It is the families. Our student body is at least 2/3 immigrant - Chinese, Indian, some German, some from Singapore. Frequently, both parents have Ph.D.s, and since Kindergarten the moms come in and complain the teachers are not assigning enough homework." In fact, his local high school was the focus of a Wall Street Journal article on just how competitive the students are:
CUPERTINO, Calif. -- By most measures, Monta Vista High here and Lynbrook High, in nearby San Jose, are among the nation's top public high schools. Both boast stellar test scores, an array of advanced-placement classes and a track record of sending graduates from the affluent suburbs of Silicon Valley to prestigious colleges.
But locally, they're also known for something else: white flight. Over the past 10 years, the proportion of white students at Lynbrook has fallen by nearly half, to 25% of the student body. At Monta Vista, white students make up less than one-third of the population, down from 45% -- this in a town that's half white. Some white Cupertino parents are instead sending their children to private schools or moving them to other, whiter public schools. More commonly, young white families in Silicon Valley say they are avoiding Cupertino altogether.
White students are far outnumbered by Asians at Monta Vista High School in Cupertino, Calif.
Whites aren't quitting the schools because the schools are failing academically. Quite the contrary: Many white parents say they're leaving because the schools are too academically driven and too narrowly invested in subjects such as math and science at the expense of liberal arts and extracurriculars like sports and other personal interests.
The two schools, put another way that parents rarely articulate so bluntly, are too Asian.
Cathy Gatley, co-president of Monta Vista High School's parent-teacher association, recently dissuaded a family with a young child from moving to Cupertino because there are so few young white kids left in the public schools. "This may not sound good," she confides, "but their child may be the only Caucasian kid in the class." ...
"The families of the low performing schools on the other side of the valley also are immigrant - largely from Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras and some from farther south, and many are undocumented. The parents frequently have little formal education and no one comes in to complain about homework levels - too little or too much."
"You could swap the student bodies, and the local Asian kids would do just as well in the bad school, and the Hispanic kids would do just as poorly here."
Here's a quick, simple fix for LV schools (at least their budget troubles): Cut all sports & 'extracurricular activities' from all public schools. This would give teachers more tutor time after school hours since they won't be busy instructing cheer-leading... Parents who want this bull**** can go to a private instructor on their own time.
UNLV should similarly cut all sports from its budget.
Here's a quick, simple fix for LV schools (at least their budget troubles): Cut all sports & 'extracurricular activities' from all public schools. This would give teachers more tutor time after school hours since they won't be busy instructing cheer-leading... Parents who want this bull**** can go to a private instructor on their own time.
UNLV should similarly cut all sports from its budget.
Instead of completely cutting those activities, move it to a pay for play. The parents pay for the extra stuff and the state pays for the education.
Atlas, while all good is the suggestion to cut sports and activities, there are not many teachers now that would be willing to stay after school to tudor unless they were getting more money. Teachers in Nevada, through all the years of hearing how bad they are and how everything is their fault, have had about enough. We do not get paid all year as most suggest, you are given the option to have extra money taken out of your checks for the months in school to cover the summer months. I also have heard that the jobs they do are easy: this I answer that I have as much schooling as most professionals, $120k in debt, and have to pay out of pocket for most things for my class at 40,000 per year. This would be like asking a secretary to pay for all staples, paper, and pens/pencils they use all year; or docs to pay for all band-aids, stitches, thermometer covers and tables covers that are used when they are on duty. Also students who want to perform well and have the family backing will do so no matter where they go to school!! I still think vouchers in Nevada would be a good idea if done correctly. Also, many things people write about rich students getting a break by vouchers is wrong as the higher your family makes the less of a voucher you can receive. There is also a cut ine that if your over this, you get NO help in going to a private school. It would greatly help the students that want to learn by letting them go to some of these better private schools in the area. They would still have to live by the rules of the school or be asked to elave, so it really would not hurt the private schools as they do have strict rules about students prior records and attitudes while attending. This is a heated subject, not just in Nevada, but everywhere and teachers in Nevada have an advantage as if they are laid-off, they can bump lower seniority teachers at other schools. In most other states, there are no such rules and if you are RIF'd or down-sized, you are unemployed until you find another job.
Atlas, while all good is the suggestion to cut sports and activities, there are not many teachers now that would be willing to stay after school to tudor unless they were getting more money. Teachers in Nevada, through all the years of hearing how bad they are and how everything is their fault, have had about enough. We do not get paid all year as most suggest, you are given the option to have extra money taken out of your checks for the months in school to cover the summer months. I also have heard that the jobs they do are easy: this I answer that I have as much schooling as most professionals, $120k in debt, and have to pay out of pocket for most things for my class at 40,000 per year. This would be like asking a secretary to pay for all staples, paper, and pens/pencils they use all year; or docs to pay for all band-aids, stitches, thermometer covers and tables covers that are used when they are on duty. Also students who want to perform well and have the family backing will do so no matter where they go to school!! I still think vouchers in Nevada would be a good idea if done correctly. Also, many things people write about rich students getting a break by vouchers is wrong as the higher your family makes the less of a voucher you can receive. There is also a cut ine that if your over this, you get NO help in going to a private school. It would greatly help the students that want to learn by letting them go to some of these better private schools in the area. They would still have to live by the rules of the school or be asked to elave, so it really would not hurt the private schools as they do have strict rules about students prior records and attitudes while attending. This is a heated subject, not just in Nevada, but everywhere and teachers in Nevada have an advantage as if they are laid-off, they can bump lower seniority teachers at other schools. In most other states, there are no such rules and if you are RIF'd or down-sized, you are unemployed until you find another job.
Obviously teachers should be paid for their after-school tutor time. It is my understanding that they are paid to coach the various after-school activities, including sports. Those activities also have other expenses associated with them like equipment. That money could instead be used to pay teachers who stay after hours to teach. It wouldn't be mandatory, just an extra for students who want to learn more & teachers who want to earn more.
I agree vouchers are the way forward. Its inevitable -- even the Federal Govt that can print money is considering Medicare vouchers. The States will be forced to go the voucher route sooner rather than later by the financial markets.
As for your personal situation, how the hell did you end up $120k in debt? State schools back in NJ cost 10k-15k a year (60k for a 4 yr degree) I assume they're around the same price, if not cheaper here. And that's assuming you debt-financed the whole thing. Would it kill college students to work while they're in school?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
