Quote :

"Its usually the blacks that choose to stay away from whites. Theres a lot more whites than blacks, but still you see blacks having a much higher percent black friends than white. "

My neighborhood growing up was in the district of a mostly black high school (90% black or so). White parents there would do almost anything to keep their kids out of the "black school," even move to another district. Out of all the white kids I knew there, very few of us went to the school we were supposed to be in.

10/2/2005 6:07:41 PM

The root of the problem is we simply have a whole lot of students and not nearly enough talented teachers to teach them. It's kind of like the lack of troops we have in Iraq. Except we aren't willing to spend ourselves into the ground for education b/c then we'd be commie liberals.

I think we need better teachers more than we need smaller classes. We could have larger class sizes with more talented teachers with more well prepared lesson plans. We should also make better use of teachers in training by having them actually teach students. It could work very similar to professors and TAs in college. The teacher teaches a large class, then the TAs work with students in break out sessions.

Also, we should change the school schedule to keep teachers employed year round. That way we could justify having less teachers and paying them more, thus getting the most talented people teaching. I think teaching has become a bit of a copout profession because of short hours and a 9 month year (and of course, low pay).

[Edited on October 2, 2005 at 7:16 PM. Reason : ?]

10/2/2005 7:16:06 PM

kids would learn better if the curriculum didnt include so much useless crap

10/2/2005 7:17:37 PM

Well part of it is I don't think there is any consensus on what students should be learning. I think the focus has gone from learning facts and fundamentals to learning critical thinking and creativity.

I went to middle school and started hs at a private school that still had a very classic curriculum. We learned facts and fundamentals, like english grammar, spelling, vocabulary, arithmetic, latin, french, shakespeare, etc. The teachers gave us notes on the chalk board, we copied them, learned them, and spit them out on the test.

I switched to public school my 10th grade year, and things were a lot different. Instead of teaching facts to us, the teachers made us do all these assignments to pass the time. We'd pretend we were the colonial governer of NC and write a letter to the King, or some shit like that. I'm not necessarily saying these types of assignments are useless (we did stuff like that too at the private school), but the teachers were using these assignments to pass the time and keep them from having to lecture as long. None of my classmates new basic grammar, like comma usage, parts of speech, sentence diagramming, etc.

Despite having 90 minute classes (vs. 50 min) the public school classes had shorter lectures. The teacher would lecture for ~30 mins, then give us an assignment or let us do homework. I had an english teacher who let us read (or talk) for 1 hour EVERY class. She'd pretend to teach for the remaining 30 mins (sometimes).

10/2/2005 7:30:28 PM

the more english syntax and grammar you know, the dumber you become

10/2/2005 7:33:18 PM

Quote :

"Also, we should change the school schedule to keep teachers employed year round. That way we could justify having less teachers and paying them more, thus getting the most talented people teaching. I think teaching has become a bit of a copout profession because of short hours and a 9 month year (and of course, low pay)."

All year schedules are becoming more popular, several schools in Raleigh use them. Centennial campus Middle School for example. But the amount of days in class is actually about the same. The major benefits are that kids don't get out of the habit of going to school and studying for 3 months, and also a lot less time is spent reviewing material from the year before.

How would your plan justify having less teachers? And I don't know what your experience in teaching is but I know many people that have student taught or have being teaching for a couple years and the hours are far from short. All day in school, then home to grade papers and work on lesson plans. And if classes are 9 months long then the teachers work 10 months. Just so you know, not trying to be a dick or anything.

I completely agree that there are some crap teachers out there but it's no secret that they aren't paid much so the college programs aren't going to draw the brightest students. Also there are different learning styles, and though the straight forward lecture may have worked well for you, it may not work for others, that's part of the problem with large classes. Bad teachers tend to teach to their learning style, a good teacher will realize that there are different learning styles, learn which students learn what way and then try to incorparate ways to reach all of them not just the majority or the ones that learn the same way as them. Not to mention things like Ability grouping vs. Tracking. That could have played part of why your classes were so different than your private school classes. Then you may have just had some really bad teachers. And really good teachers at your private school.

10/2/2005 9:06:51 PM

as far as just learning facts and fundamentals schools should be including that but the role playing is meant to take it to a higher level of learning. Google "blooms taxonomy". According to Bloom's theory, which is very popular, there are six levels of learning. Memorizing facts is the lowest form of learning. By doing the activities you're refering to as creative, assuming the students have memorized and understand the facts, it allows the students to apply and analyze what they have learned. Like I said before b/c of learning styles this may not work with all students but it is a good way to get many students to the next levels of learning.

10/2/2005 9:13:31 PM

Quote :

"The root of the problem is we simply have a whole lot of students and not nearly enough talented teachers to teach them. It's kind of like the lack of troops we have in Iraq. Except we aren't willing to spend ourselves into the ground for education b/c then we'd be commie liberals."

I disagree on the lack of teachers. I've had several friends outside of the education arena that tell me they'd love to teach if it compared at all to the money/opportunities they'll get elsewhere. Teaching simply isn't an economically viable profession except at college levels, and even the professors IMO don't make enough.

Public school teachers historically have never been held with great esteem in American society. In the late 1700s and early 1800s most teachers worked on an irregular basis, usually while on break from professions or their own schooling, in a similar fashion to high school students finding summer jobs. Since property taxes paid for public education, schools rarely had much money to pay for quality schooling since politicians knew better than to raise taxes but so much. In the 1800s teaching became a more regular profession but the public viewed them as "has-been's" and "never will be's." Women began taking control of a profession since men abhored the connotations and women had fewer economic opportunities to choose from.

This view of teachers persisted to the present day. The bottom line is you get what you pay for, and if the public continues to underfund schools then we should expect more bad teachers. This isn't a plug for me since I'm going to be a teacher (although an increase in salary would be nice), it's a statement of fact.

10/2/2005 10:09:39 PM

^ Glad you realize your place, now swallow the pay cut or go start your own cheaper private school and lobby for the introduction of school vouchers.

10/2/2005 10:19:24 PM

Quote :

"All year schedules are becoming more popular, several schools in Raleigh use them. Centennial campus Middle School for example. But the amount of days in class is actually about the same. The major benefits are that kids don't get out of the habit of going to school and studying for 3 months, and also a lot less time is spent reviewing material from the year before."

No, I mean use it to have teachers teaching more kids. If you increase class sizes and have teachers teach twice as classes per year, you could afford better teachers. Kind of drastic, sure, but it could work.

10/2/2005 11:49:00 PM

you cant lobby bribe your way into public schools while having CHEAP PRICES... you have to be a crook

10/2/2005 11:51:05 PM

Erios, I know my ideas were drastic and extreme. I just wonder that if we could get by with less, more talented teachers than more less talented teachers. We seem to have an unrealistic goal right now of having smaller class sizes and better teachers. Especially since I heard NC needs to hire 11,000 teachers per year and is only graduating about 3200 teachers per year.

Quote :

"as far as just learning facts and fundamentals schools should be including that but the role playing is meant to take it to a higher level of learning. Google "blooms taxonomy". According to Bloom's theory, which is very popular, there are six levels of learning. Memorizing facts is the lowest form of learning. By doing the activities you're refering to as creative, assuming the students have memorized and understand the facts, it allows the students to apply and analyze what they have learned. Like I said before b/c of learning styles this may not work with all students but it is a good way to get many students to the next levels of learning."

I understand that. It's the balance that I question. My classmates in public school missed out on the fundamentals. I'm not saying we didn't do those sorts of activities at the private school. I guess we used the time we saved not having to prepare for standardized tests to do that.

[Edited on October 2, 2005 at 11:57 PM. Reason : ?]

10/2/2005 11:56:44 PM

Quote :

"Especially since I heard NC needs to hire 11,000 teachers per year and is only graduating about 3200 teachers per year."

Job security ftw.

I don't like them because it will hurt the students who need the most help- 1) the kids whos' parents don't care about them 2) special needs children.

10/3/2005 12:15:45 AM

Quote :

"No, I mean use it to have teachers teaching more kids. If you increase class sizes and have teachers teach twice as classes per year, you could afford better teachers. Kind of drastic, sure, but it could work."

I just don't think that would work, I mean we all went through primary and secondary school. How often could you just dick around and the teacher not notice, with 25-30 kids in the class? Imagine what it would be like with 45 or 50 kids. Keeping the attention of children is hard enough as it is. There would be very little personal attention for students, which some really need, and it would be extremely difficult to have classroom discussions which is a valuable technique. Class structure would have to be lecture, and that's just tough to do with high school and middle school children. Mentally they are just not on the same level as a 20 year old. Some are, you may have been, but most are not. The teachers would have to spend twice as much time grading papers. I don't know what you know about ability grouping but it would make that much more difficult, which could cause achievement gaps within an individual class. Some students would be way ahead of the other students while some would be way behind because you have to teach to the majority. How do you keep either of those two groups motivated? Kids don't want to continue to do work when they feel like they are "slower", "dumber" or "just don't get it" compared to the rest of the class. While the kids that are finishing ahead of everyone else and learning the material faster will lose interest in the work because it's just too easy. There are a lot of reasons for smaller class size than most people realize. It allows students to be grouped with simialar students so that the best techniques can be used to teach them, which is somewhat of a contraversial issue but I've done some research on it and I believe if it's done correctly it's very beneficial. It's also greatly aids in discipline. It's much easier to control 30 kids than 50.

Why can't we have better teachers and the same size classes. What if the government set some national standards for teachers salaries. Minumums, percantage increase with each year they return, with each degree they progress, etc.. A lot of states already do this to some extent but they should increase it, but maybe make the teachers take tests to increase to another pay level. If we could create a desire for students to want to pursue education as a career, ie. good pay, than more students would want to major in education. In turn education programs would raise their standards for admiting students. Currently for the college of ed. here at state the min. gpa is 2.5, maybe lower. But look at the min. for engineering or business, they are higher. They're only high though because so many students want to get into the program and there is limited space. If education programs became more competitive then better students could be admitted, which in turn would generate better teachers. The only problem is this cycle has to start somewhere, and where ever it is it will be unjustified at that moment. Ed. Schools could raise their standards but that would turn away a lot of students and there would be even more of a shortage of teachers for a while, if not permanatly. Not that there aren't any ed. majors that couldn't have majored in tougher programs, but it would cause them to lose a lot of potential students. Pay for teachers could be increased, but their abilities wouldn't reflect it at the moment, so it would probably be opposed by many people. There are a lot of possible solutions, but I don't think increasing class sizes is one of them.

Also the whole teachers don't get paid thing, which scares so many people away, isn't entirely true. It really depends on where in the country you are. I had teachers in highschool making 70k. That's damn good money as far as I'm concerned. Now they didn't start out making that much, but they got grad-degrees and kept coming back, so they got raises. But this was in northern DE, which pays higher than NC. Starting pay in that part of DE is about 35k, but you could go 15 minutes into PA and start at 45k. There are also teachers unions further to the north that will actually fight for the teachers, there are unions here but they don't do anything. So depending on where you are, if you work hard and be patient you can make decent money. I think pay in NC sucks though, and something needs to be done about it, that's usually through taxes, especially in the example of PA. So people have to be willing to sacrifice. Pay the teachers more, however that may be, and the school systems will get better.

This got some what off topic of the original post.

[Edited on October 3, 2005 at 1:40 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on October 3, 2005 at 1:43 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on October 3, 2005 at 1:44 AM. Reason : pay]

10/3/2005 1:24:37 AM

Quote :

"I think pay in NC sucks though, and something needs to be done about it, that's usually through taxes, especially in the example of PA."

I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

Quote :

"I just don't think that would work, I mean we all went through primary and secondary school. How often could you just dick around and the teacher not notice, with 25-30 kids in the class? Imagine what it would be like with 45 or 50 kids. Keeping the attention of children is hard enough as it is. There would be very little personal attention for students, which some really need, and it would be extremely difficult to have classroom discussions which is a valuable technique."

Ok, yea wouldnt work so well for lower grades. And in high school, it wouldn't work so well for the bad students who are probably more numerous than the good students (at least where I'm from).

Besides throwing money at the problem, what would you suggest? What are other states/countries doing differently?

10/3/2005 8:34:47 AM

A lot of other countries don't have every child going to the equivalent of high school. They also don't have to deal with the tremendous ethnic and racial diversity here in the US, where politics, prejudice, and old habits have traditionally stymied efforts to improve our education systrem.

10/3/2005 8:15:20 PM

http://www.wral.com/judge-halts-nc-school-voucher-program/13416499/

I was wondering if this was going to happen.

Even my child's daycare uses the voucher program, but I think the child care vouchers are still on the table - maybe even a different program altogether. While I don't think school vouchers are necessarily a bad idea, it floors me that somebody pays 350 for the exact same care my daughter gets, while I pay 1125/month.

[Edited on February 21, 2014 at 2:03 PM. Reason : ada]

2/21/2014 1:59:27 PM

as soon as conservatives found out that the largest recipient is a muslim school, they would have ended them anyways

2/21/2014 3:00:12 PM

2005. A simpler time.

2/21/2014 4:10:50 PM

I thought it was impossible to resurrect threads so ancient. But alas, Erios nailed it back in 2005, and their post still stands the test of time. Pretty good record there.

2/23/2014 2:37:33 PM

Schooling is a minor factor in student performance and private schools aren't really better than public ones when you control for demographics.

2/23/2014 2:42:18 PM

Another quality thread by Socks``

2/24/2014 10:58:10 AM

^^ That makes sense. The perception of private schools being better is largely born to the fact that families that have involved parents or other support systems are the ones that choose private schools anyway.

A voucher system doesn't change this part of the equation. If you want to fix underperforming students, you have to change their households. Vouchers only give people a way to segregate themselves from bad students, which doesn't really solve any societal problems.

2/24/2014 12:23:35 PM