Education

Chapdog said:
$40 an hour isnt really shitty.. its just that its part time work.
Click to expand...

I would not consider teaching part time work at all. With the laws that are in effect now the school year gets longer and longer. So what used to be 3 months off in the summer is now 7-8 weeks. Add to that the professional development required in summer (about 2 weeks worth) and the nightly and weekend grading sessions you are looking at alot more than 180 days.
 
TexasMeg said:
I would not consider teaching part time work at all. With the laws that are in effect now the school year gets longer and longer. So what used to be 3 months off in the summer is now 7-8 weeks. Add to that the professional development required in summer (about 2 weeks worth) and the nightly and weekend grading sessions you are looking at alot more than 180 days.
Click to expand...

i know lots of teachers that pick up extra work during the summer and make another 20k.. actually know one dude who teaches horticulture for 55k then also makes 50k plowing and landscaping on the side. tho hes working probably 2500 hours per year.
 
Isn't it interesting that the topic really was (I think, it was so long ago!) what should be done about our sagging educational system, and we now have six pages of posts about money.

Teacher salaries certainly are one component, and even that is complex, but why don't we begin to address what needs to be improved and overhauled (and turfed out) in our educational institutions?

We're dealing with students who have gone through regular school and college, and some of them can't write a legible sentence or even formulate a rational idea or argument. What's wrong with a system that doesn't prepare students to deal with the world? That's what I'd like to see us discuss!
 
Thorn said:
Isn't it interesting that the topic really was (I think, it was so long ago!) what should be done about our sagging educational system, and we now have six pages of posts about money.

Teacher salaries certainly are one component, and even that is complex, but why don't we begin to address what needs to be improved and overhauled (and turfed out) in our educational institutions?

We're dealing with students who have gone through regular school and college, and some of them can't write a legible sentence or even formulate a rational idea or argument. What's wrong with a system that doesn't prepare students to deal with the world? That's what I'd like to see us discuss!
Click to expand...

This thread is right on line with about as much creativity as our politicians put into the problem which is almost none. Therefore politicians get away with saying 'we need more money for schools' and everyone thinks they care.
 
I curious, what would you like to see changed in education? What do you think the purpose of schools, (k-12) should be? What do you think the challenges are, today regarding financing, qualifications of teachers, expectations of the public, and the differences in student populations across the country?

I'd appreciate if any responders would say whether or not they are currently parents, students, teachers, or just plain old taxpayers. Thanks.

BTW, I'm a teacher.
 
Kathianne said:
I curious, what would you like to see changed in education? What do you think the purpose of schools, (k-12) should be? What do you think the challenges are, today regarding financing, qualifications of teachers, expectations of the public, and the differences in student populations across the country?

I'd appreciate if any responders would say whether or not they are currently parents, students, teachers, or just plain old taxpayers. Thanks.

BTW, I'm a teacher.
Click to expand...

For me personally I would like to see some element of competition enter into the school system. By that I don't mean start turning all schools into for profits etc. But I feel since public schools have a basic monopoly there is never a need to change or improve because there are no alternatives. The discussion about competition would be far more detailed.

I would like to see some form of compensation where the best teachers get higher pay. I understand finding a formula for this is not easy but with the will I believe it can be done. Outside of their love for kids teachers are not incentivized to do anymore than they have to.

I understand the idea about wanting teachers to have a certain education level or take certain classes but I believe there should be a way for some in industry who specialize in a field, math or science for example, to be able to teach and not have to take a year's class or whatever the typical requirement is.

These are just a several thoughts and a welcome break from doing this boring *ss lease abstract.
 
I'm going to respond to Cawako, but curious. I thought so many here were concerned, about the country, about the young.

Not so, from what I can see.
 
I'd like to see some education system that does not hold all students to the same standard. Whether that requires testing at an early age and directing them toward a particular academy or vocation I don't know.

But this "One-Size-Fits-All" education has got to go.
 
Epicurus said:
I'd like to see some education system that does not hold all students to the same standard. Whether that requires testing at an early age and directing them toward a particular academy or vocation I don't know.

But this "One-Size-Fits-All" education has got to go.
Click to expand...

Ok, can you expand? Are you addressing the idea that some are artistic, some verbal, some athletic?
 
Kathianne said:
Ok, can you expand? Are you addressing the idea that some are artistic, some verbal, some athletic?
Click to expand...

Well yes that, but basically I think that we really hold our top kids down.

I always tested extremely high, but until 7th grade when I entered Gifted School I was in classes with kids who literally could not read.

You can't expect to be able to adequately teach a subject to a class effectively where one student is bored because he already knows what you're teaching, and another student is bored because he can't even read and isn't bothering to listen to you.

The diversity of intelligence and commitment in schools is remarkable, but problematic. The illiterate student should not be held to the same standard as the other one. It is simply unfair.

Classes should exist for motivated intelligent students, motivated average students, and remedial classes for those who need to catch up.

But this is a dream system that would never get implemented, I'm merely fantasizing based on my experiences as a student who was severely constrained by the ignorance of his classmates.
 
I think the biggest problem facing government schools is that they are completely socialized and are becoming more and more centrally planned.

As Warren said, we hold the top kids down and often teach over the heads of the lower ones. This problem grows as we move more towards central planning.

I hear some people talking about how this...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR2008021802244_pf.html

...is an example of dumbing down or failing to teach them the basics. But I understood number theory almost instinctively by using these same techniques without guidance. Once in college and learning different number systems, I saw my fellow students struggling. I realized just how poorly many understand math. I thought then it might be useful to teach at a younger age.

Gotta mention the 1/3 thread again which was basically due to Dixie's inability to grasp these concepts.

But the thing is, is some kids probably can't handle this and most will never need it. It might only serve to confuse them. So one size fits all is bad for both the upper and lower levels.

Socialist systems ensure the teachers are not likely to be adequately motivated and that the issues of schooling are decided by political pressures and special intests rather than delivering the best service to customers.

The way to solve both of these problems is simple. Have the government provide financing only for education and let markets do the rest.
 
RStringfield said:
We don't need higher standards. We need no standards, at the federal level.

Further, we need to quit assuming every child should receive the same education. It ends up failing many and leaving them with no skills. Lots of kids are never going to use number theory and will have an understanding of math at Dixie's level or below. Trying to teach them such concepts may ultimately confuse them on the basics.
Click to expand...

With regard to math, I will say that I am one of the world's worst math students. I never failed math, because I cared enough to do my homework and study for tests (and study for retakes), but I even had a smart dad at home who's a chemist, and he could go over math and chemistry homework and I could understand little of his coaching on math and absolutely nothing he tried to show me on chemistry. The worst I ever did was D+'s in sophomore math (which is pathetic when you consider that I never skipped class except on the occassion of Senior Skip Day and worked reasonably hard throughout high school).

Furthermore, I passed the WA State Test (WASL) and the Iowa Test (ITED, which didn't even count for anything). One of the biggest challenges is motivating students. I mean, I sat through math for four years, and had to endure the stupidity of students (many of whom were comprehending better than me) going "okay, how does this concept apply to my future life?"
 
Kathianne said:
Ok, can you expand? Are you addressing the idea that some are artistic, some verbal, some athletic?
Click to expand...

Athletic has little to do with learning styles in my opinion. Though those that exercise do tend to get a boost from endorphines which help energy levels, mood and focus.

That said, I do believe in the various learning styles. Some people need to hear something explained to understand, others need to visualize (read) to learn, others need to actually DO whatever it is they are learning. Some learn with a combination.

Performance in class can often be dictated by learning style of the individual student vs. teaching style of the teacher.

Case in point... on of my friends in high school was horrid at taking tests, memorizing text to regurgitate etc... but was a friggin genius when it came to creating via working with his hands.... ie rebuilding cars, building furniture, homes etc... He damn near flunked out of high school. Yet he started his own construction company and has the ability to retire at any point he chooses now.

I think we should re-tool our schools ... this is just off the cuff... food for thought.... etc...

We should be teaching languages (at least English and Spanish) when kids are young and able to pick up languages easier. Ages 2-4. Math skills can begin being taught around age 4.

Kindergarten/1st they can focus time on languages/reading and math, but then add in creative time and of course.... recess.

2nd-6th.... continue advancing in math, reading comprehension/writing skills, creative time, recess and add in the sciences and history.

7th-8th.... add in basic business/economics. Make sure everyone takes algebra and geometry along with health class. Continue with more advanced science classes.

high school.... design it more like colleges. have a few core requirements each year, but let the students develop the course of study that interests them.
 
Looks good except for HS. You may well be preparing students for AA/AS degrees, but in compartmentalizing them so soon, you screw with the liberal arts. While building up a foundation for science/math early on will ease the load, HS students still need quite a bit of time working on history and geography, foreign language, business/shop, and that alone takes up quite a bit of time...
 
Damocles said:
The problem was, he talked about change but then promoted the same old. It's hard to believe change when there is no change promoted.
Click to expand...

hi d/ca

been gone for a while, but you have put your finger on what troubles me about ob

he has the charisma and the words but he seems more fluff than substance

my older daughter has read his books and says that he has written about what he stands for, but i am worried about the lack of substance in his speeches - is he a man on a white horse or just another politician that says what he thinks people what to hear

i still prefer hc, but would vote for ob if he says more substantial things during his campaign, otherwise i may vote for mccain or worst case, alfred e neuman

on a more personal note, i have another procedure scheduled for the 26th - the kidneys have improved, but only to 60% of normal...oh well
 
DonQuixote said:
hi d/ca

been gone for a while, but you have put your finger on what troubles me about ob

he has the charisma and the words but he seems more fluff than substance

my older daughter has read his books and says that he has written about what he stands for, but i am worried about the lack of substance in his speeches - is he a man on a white horse or just another politician that says what he thinks people what to hear

i still prefer hc, but would vote for ob if he says more substantial things during his campaign, otherwise i may vote for mccain or worst case, alfred e neuman

on a more personal note, i have another procedure scheduled for the 26th - the kidneys have improved, but only to 60% of normal...oh well
Click to expand...
I know what you mean, DQ. I am having a hard time convincing myself to vote for McCain too though. I may just vote Libertarian two in a row...

Good to see ya back, if only for a while.
 
cawacko said:
I watched all of Obama's speech last night and had the biggest reaction when started speaking about education. As an aside I'm referencing Obama here but what he said was pretty similar to what almost all politicians, Republicans and Democrats, say which is a lot of nothing. So I'm not trying to single out Obama.

He made a jab at NCLB with a 'don't teach to the test comment'. Otherwise he said we need higher standards, a typical political refrain, but what does that mean? How do you quanifty 'higher standards'? He said good teachers need to make more money but then he said he would raise all teachers salaries. Then he said we need more family involvement which is true.

Many people agree education is one of the top priorities for us as a nation yet we get the same canned speech from each politician with almost always the same talking points. And since there is no easy to way to measure or judge students performance outside test results we seem to be stuck with the status quo year after year regardless of what each new crop of politicians say.
Click to expand...

An elderly aunt of mine used to "teach to the test." She believed in it. She didn't know much - not like she graduated college summa cum laude at 20 with a double major, not like she had a doctorate, not like she was principal of one of the top ten high schools in the USA. NAaaah, just an idiot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top