House formally apologizes for slavery and Jim Crow

[MontereyVol]

Not necessarily. Government is already involved, thus the term "public." But it's clear not all public schools are alike, and that's where the problem seems to lie.

We don't have to drive 2 miles in any direction to pass a public school that's not up to par. But I also can think of 3 public schools in particular that are excellent in just about every capacity. They produce top-notch graduates who are smart, skilled, athletic, and well-rounded. Basically entirely government funded. Respected by just about everyone. And basically entirely free to those who attend.

The Air Force Academy.
The Naval Academy.
West Point.

So, are we in agreement that government funded public schools can work?

The kids who choose to go to those schools know what they are in for. If we ran our public system the way those three are ran, parents would be sueing the crap out of them and children everywhere would be whining their butts off and dropping out in huge numbers.

 

[volinbham]

Try this idea out.

Create academies for training public school teachers. Require a similar post-grad commitment to public schooling as the military academy grads must give to the military (5 yrs or more, correct?). Pay them adequately and encourage them to make it a respectable profession. Place them where they're needed most. Find a better method of identifying and terminating underperforming public school teachers (No Child isn't the answer). Return to busing so that quality of education isn't linked to the value of your residence. Institute a dress code for school hours and school functions. Hold students to high standards of improvement and performance (knowing that each student will have different goals). Make learning as fun as it is chore by teaching not just the basics of reading, writing, arithmetic, but also real-world skills like computer literacy, how to manage your finances, how to look for a job, etc.

That's a start.

The idea is that if we put half the time, money and attention into public schools that we do the military academies (and perhaps apply some similar techniques), maybe public schools' reputations will get better.

The military academies are highly exclusive. I can tell you from experience that if I get to choose who's in my class based on their ability, I can put out a top notch product. They also are relatively free from the bonds of PC-crap.

Post-secondary education is a different beast - it is non-compulsory and more independent. Each institution is more free to shape curriculum to match the goals of the institution.

While this is only one problem with public school systems, they are plagued by lowest common denominator PC crap - every perspective has to be represented so the curriculum is diluted so as not to offend any and as a result, offends most. Education unions protect jobs more than students. The Birmingham school district has provided convincing proof that putting more money into the system is not the answer.

 

[allvol123]

The kids who choose to go to those schools know what they are in for. If we ran our public system the way those three are ran, parents would be sueing the crap out of them and children everywhere would be whining their butts off and dropping out in huge numbers.

That would at least be helpful to the kids who wanted an education.

 

[TennNC]

If we ran our public system the way those three are ran, parents would be sueing the crap out of them and children everywhere would be whining their butts off and dropping out in huge numbers.

doesn't that happen already?

 

[TennNC]

The military academies are highly exclusive. I can tell you from experience that if I get to choose who's in my class based on their ability, I can put out a top notch product. They also are relatively free from the bonds of PC-crap.

Post-secondary education is a different beast - it is non-compulsory and more independent. Each institution is more free to shape curriculum to match the goals of the institution.

While this is only one problem with public school systems, they are plagued by lowest common denominator PC crap - every perspective has to be represented so the curriculum is diluted so as not to offend any and as a result, offends most. Education unions protect jobs more than students. The Birmingham school district has provided convincing proof that putting more money into the system is not the answer.

I sense two underlying themes to your post.

1) An assumption that I'm suggesting we just put more money toward it and all will be okay.

2) A lack of faith in your (and other teachers') ability to turn underachieving students into achieving students.

Am I wrong?

 

[TennNC]

You can argue you the first point all you want and while it may be true, the fact is the students that enter those institutions are eager to be there. That is where a huge difference lies, when comparing them against your random run of the mill school down the road.

Do you think it's possible to make more kids eager to want to be in school? B/c if not, that's not a problem any school - private or public - can cure. and it's a problem with significant repercussions for everyone.

 

[allvol123]

Do you think it's possible to make more kids eager to want to be in school? B/c if not, that's not a problem any school - private or public - can cure. and it's a problem with significant repercussions for everyone.

To an extent, you can make kids more eager to go to school. But the government cannot take over child welfare 24 hours a day. If you(or anyone) wants to take an aimless child into your home and raise him or her and set them on the path to success, well I salute you. You can't force people to care, they either get involved or they don't. People do not need federal assistance to help out the kid down the street and furthermore, federal assistance will probably hinder the helping of the kid down the street.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Not necessarily. Government is already involved, thus the term "public." But it's clear not all public schools are alike, and that's where the problem seems to lie.

We don't have to drive 2 miles in any direction to pass a public school that's not up to par. But I also can think of 3 public schools in particular that are excellent in just about every capacity. They produce top-notch graduates who are smart, skilled, athletic, and well-rounded. Basically entirely government funded. Respected by just about everyone. And basically entirely free to those who attend.

The Air Force Academy.
The Naval Academy.
West Point.

So, are we in agreement that government funded public schools can work?

I can tell from something close to first hand experience that the academies get to be extremely selective in their admission process. Any comparison to public education system is rendered moot solely in that difference.

The military approach works, but truly only for those self motivated and with reason to put up with the pain they extract.

You mentioned that the education is free. I'd submit that graduates paid it back about a nickel at a time while there and followed that up with a 5 year military stint.

 

[BigPapaVol]

doesn't that happen already?

whining, maybe, but the dropout thing - no.

 

[volinbham]

I sense two underlying themes to your post.

1) An assumption that I'm suggesting we just put more money toward it and all will be okay.

2) A lack of faith in your (and other teachers') ability to turn underachieving students into achieving students.

Am I wrong?

Wrong on both themes.

1) I don't think that's your only idea

2) I have complete faith that some teachers can turn underachieving students into achieving ones.

 

[TennNC]

1) The military approach works, but truly only for those self motivated and with reason to put up with the pain they extract.

2) You mentioned that the education is free. I'd submit that graduates paid it back about a nickel at a time while there and followed that up with a 5 year military stint.

1) How do you know that some of those kids aren't motivated and with reason to put up with the pain? Don't you think that, given the opportunity of something other than what they have now, some would certainly take to it?

2) You neglected to acknowledge my proposal about teachers paying it back by teaching at public schools.

 

[TennNC]

Wrong on both themes.

1) I don't think that's your only idea

2) I have complete faith that some teachers can turn underachieving students into achieving ones.

Then why are you opposed to us caring more about improving public education? It seems you've given up.

 

[TennNC]

whining, maybe, but the dropout thing - no.

You're right. Seems they're in prison instead.

Child Trends DataBank - High School Dropout Rates

In 1972, the dropout rate among non-Hispanic blacks was 21 percent, 12 percent among non-Hispanic whites, and 34 percent for Hispanic youth. These rates have since declined substantially for each group. The dropout rate for non-Hispanic black youth reached an historic low of 11 percent in 2005. (See Figure 1) This drop is at least in part related to increased incarceration rates among black male high school dropouts, which more than doubled between 1980 and 1999, thus removing them from the civilian non-institutionalized population on which these estimates are based.

 

[BigPapaVol]

1) How do you know that some of those kids aren't motivated and with reason to put up with the pain? Don't you think that, given the opportunity of something other than what they have now, some would certainly take to it?

2) You neglected to acknowledge my proposal about teachers paying it back by teaching at public schools.

1. I think very few would find it bearable and schooling is not something you can do without spreading the cost over significant numbers.

2. I think you might have something on #2, but I don't really seeing it be a true draw because an education degree just isn't really going to pay off, regardless of where it's from. On another note, I don't want teachers being 5 year temps looking to bolt to make use of their high dollar education later.

 

[TennNC]

1. I think very few would find it bearable and schooling is not something you can do without spreading the cost over significant numbers.

2. I think you might have something on #2, but I don't really seeing it be a true draw because an education degree just isn't really going to pay off, regardless of where it's from. On another note, I don't want teachers being 5 year temps looking to bolt to make use of their high dollar education later.

1. So, we shouldn't try b/c it might be too challenging? In other words, it's worth the investment to train people to go fight in places like Iraq, but it's not worth it to try to keep kids from becoming gangstas in our own backyard.

2. But the 5-year plan works for the military, doesn't it? I don't want a 5-year temp on the front lines looking to bolt to make more money from his West Point education either, but I trust that he will honor his service admirably.

 

[BigPapaVol]

1. So, we shouldn't try b/c it might be too challenging? In other words, it's worth the investment to train people to go fight in places like Iraq, but it's not worth it to try to keep kids from becoming gangstas in our own backyard.

2. But the 5-year plan works for the military, doesn't it? I don't want a 5-year temp on the front lines looking to bolt to make more money from his West Point education either, but I trust that he will honor his service admirably.

1. I'm not saying it's too challenging. I'm saying there would not be enough participants to warrant the cost.

2. But the 5 year plan has only recently begun to matter. Part of the military academy function is to train those who want to make it a career. I would say that the vast majority of my classmates went into the Army planning on a 20 year career. Clinton's cutbacks changed much of that viewpoint, but it was truly the way we felt. I'm not sure that a teacher from Princeton with classmates headed all over making dramatically more money would have the same view of teaching.

 

[volinbham]

Then why are you opposed to us caring more about improving public education? It seems you've given up.

You are reading much into my posts that isn't there.

My comments were a reaction to your military academy analogy which I don't think fits well at all.

 

[TennNC]

1. I'm not saying it's too challenging. I'm saying there would not be enough participants to warrant the cost.

2. But the 5 year plan has only recently begun to matter. Part of the military academy function is to train those who want to make it a career. I would say that the vast majority of my classmates went into the Army planning on a 20 year career. Clinton's cutbacks changed much of that viewpoint, but it was truly the way we felt. I'm not sure that a teacher from Princeton with classmates headed all over making dramatically more money would have the same view of teaching.

1. I can't argue against this, but I'd love to start some charter schools as a test to show what could happen to the "least" among us.

2. There are plenty of qualified people who could be called to serving their country in the classroom, just like your classmates who were called to serve their country in the Army. Both sets of people could've made more in the private sector, but that wasn't their primary aim. I would like to see a longer commitment and better compensation than something like, say, Teach for America.

 

[TennNC]

You are reading much into my posts that isn't there.

My comments were a reaction to your military academy analogy which I don't think fits well at all.

okay.

 

[allvol123]

1. I can't argue against this, but I'd love to start some charter schools as a test to show what could happen to the "least" among us.

2. There are plenty of qualified people who could be called to serving their country in the classroom, just like your classmates who were called to serve their country in the Army. Both sets of people could've made more in the private sector, but that wasn't their primary aim. I would like to see a longer commitment and better compensation than something like, say, Teach for America.

To point 2, have retirees in your plan for teaching. They are knowledgeable, don't need much money, and are bored.

 

[BigPapaVol]

1. I can't argue against this, but I'd love to start some charter schools as a test to show what could happen to the "least" among us.

2. There are plenty of qualified people who could be called to serving their country in the classroom, just like your classmates who were called to serve their country in the Army. Both sets of people could've made more in the private sector, but that wasn't their primary aim. I would like to see a longer commitment and better compensation than something like, say, Teach for America.

I still help recruit some for Army and work with our local MALO to get kids in. I'll assure you that West Point does a disproportionate amount of its work in trying to find disadvantaged folks and inner city kids to get there. Even cut down some of the appointment process to help, but the interest level is shockingly low.

 

[volinbham]

Nothing wrong with preparing teachers better but the problems are much deeper than teachers:

1. Parents - uninvolved and too involved
2. Teacher unions - protect jobs vs protect education
3. Administrators - see #2 above
4. Lawyers - schools are paralyzed by fear of lawsuits
5. Political correctness - the "offended" culture we live in is pushing lowest common denominator education.

The problems are systemic. Reform requires addressing all these issues. I'm all for reform.

 

[TennNC]

fair enough. good discussion.