Public School Problem, or American Culture Problem? - Page 2

[sosurreal09]

I may have an interesting take on all of this. I grew up in a poor area and am only 23 y/o now so my experience is pretty fresh still.

Our school system sucked. We didn't even have homework in HS b/c we couldn't take the books home...but we had security guards in every hallway...everyone acted out all the time. There were 3 stabbings in my 4 years there. It was ridiculous.

In 10th grade I got into the voc that was a part of this school. It completely changed my life. The ONLY kids who had any drive were the kids in voc. I did go to college after a year of partying and I wanted to be a nurse but the waiting list was 4 YEARS LONG so I gave up...I did general studies for a year and then got pregnant and had DD. I decided she needed me more than I needed to work or go to school. When we are done having kids and they are all in school (if we don't end up homeschooling) I want to be a MW..

The rest of the people in my voc class went to college only one dropped out besides me and even though there were only like 16 of us in the class I think that is pretty good considering...

Edited to add: 6 of the girls in my class were already mothers and 2 were pregnant by the time we graduated. So that is obviously not ideal either.
 

Originally Posted by Coral123 

For me, I think the problem in public education is in the first few years of elementary where kids aren't getting a good foundation in the basics. 

I'd agree that it is problematic when people are taking remedial math after they graduate from high school.  Why is that though?  Perhaps they weren't being steered to take math throughout high school.  This recently changed in our areas but at one time you only had to take two years of math in high school.

I'm not against vocational training, but what happens if someone changes their mind, and they haven't received the type of education that will prepare them for college.

[ramama]

Originally Posted by whatsnextmom 

I have believed for a long time that American culture and parenting trends were interfering with our children's education. Our kids have everything. I would even see my impoverished preschoolers come in with 50 dollar shoes they'll outgrow in a week. It's become important in our culture for our kids to HAVE what we feel all the other kids have and so even the poorest will attempt to give "stuff" they can't afford. Kids grow up the center of the world and getting what they want never having to really work for it. The entitlement I see in the younger generation is ghastly. My DH hires (and fires) 20-somethings regularly and while there is occasionally a great kid coming in ready for entry level hard work and eager to prove him/herself and climb the ladder, most kids he gets want top dollar for minimal work and then scoff at half their responsibilities as "below" them. This translates into the classroom where kids want "A's" for nothing and I've seen parents race in practically rabid to fight for their child's grades having no concept of where that child truely stands in the class.

I don't think it's a matter of kids needing MORE parental involvement as much as APPROPRIATE parental involvement. Their egos are too wrapped up in the outward success of a child. Kids aren't allowed to crash and burn when they need to. They aren't given enough control over their schedule. They are BUSY but they aren't allowed to develop an internal drive. Often they go off to college with no idea how to push and manage themselves.

What we expect from our children behaviorally is a problem as well. When I was in elementary, you might have that "one" kid in your grade everyone knew was a challenge and parents sighed when they'd be in their child's class that year. Now, you can have 3 or 4 per class with far more extreme and regular rebellions. Parents are quick to defend their child, use labels to excuse behavior, deflect the issue onto someone else, ect. I've spent a lot of time in the classrooms and I'm shocked at the back-talk, the flat refusal to work, the constant disruption. I just don't know how a teacher can get anything done.

I do also feel that college is becoming a problem. Most jobs that now require a degree really don't "need" a degree. I see ads for receptionists that ask for college degrees when really, what they want is a quick and emotionally/socially mature individual. That individual could go very high in the company with practical experience alone. I do value a college education but there needs to be something inbetween. There needs to be a place for trade and gained experience.

I'm speaking generally of course. There are some fantastic, driven, hard-working kids and we are fortunate enough to know so many of them. I just see the other side too and it's not good. Everyone means well but we both push and baby innapropriately. Believe me, I put myself in this catergory. I find that I've given my kids far less responsibility in the household than I had as a kid (and I had far less than my parents who were working the fields as young as 6.) I often catch myself "worried" that I'm giving my kids too much work... like washing the dishes a couple times a week after dinner despite the fact that I did that every night growing up! I often catch myself defaulting to "let's make their life easier" as opposed to "let's give them the skills they need to succeed in life."

I remember learning about the phenomenon of the extended childhood in some class I took as an undergrad.  Probably adolescent psychology or something of the like.  It used to be that kids were adults at 18, or before.  Now it seems that true adulthood doesn't start for quite a few years after than, usually post-college.  Not for everyone, but for many.  You know, kids can't earn a living wage fresh out of high school, nor can they pay their own tuition, so they depend on parents for those things.  Even a minimum wage job worked during college barely covers minimum expenses (like car insurance, etc.) so they depend on parents for a lot of those things too.  Many parents want their kids to focus on study and not work while in college, so the kids depend on their parents to fund everything (including their partying LOL) and have no idea what a work ethic is when they graduate.  Then they get out of college and may even get a loan from parents for a down payment on a house, or a parent may buy them a car as a graduation gift.  That's ridiculous to me (and totally out of reach financially to provide that stuff for our kids).

I can't even pretend that my kids pull their own weight around here LOL.  They do a half-assed job cleaning their room every once in a while, and that's pretty much it.  I keep meaning to make a chore list for them, but haven't yet.  I had sooooo many more responsibilities as a child.

Originally Posted by One_Girl 

It would be nice if kids could get both the education and a vocation that would serve them in the real world.  I think it would be very possible if teachers were trained to teach the important skills and material from textbooks and leave the rest alone.  I remember memorizing so much nonsense material in school that had no practical use in the real world and when I was going to college I had a professor talk about how wonderful she was for having her students memorize the names of all the rivers in Egypt.  I think cultural knowledge and understanding how geography shapes civilization is important, but teachers go about it in such long drawn out way that by the time you get to talking about how the rivers shaped the geography the children are daydreaming about recess because they thought that memorizing the river names for the test was the important information.  There are many subjects where teachers draw the topic out to death before getting to the point and if they could concisely make their point, or better yet guide the students into discovering the point, they could get a lot more done, students would understand that there was a point to the subjects they were forced to study in school, and there would be time for teaching practical skills.  It would be nice to be able to go to school for 13 years to be prepared for more than a job at McDonalds or school for 13 more years before you can hopefully have a secure job with insurance. 

Ain't that the truth!  I had a college professor (Medieval and Renaissance literature) who required us to memorize the reigns of all the kings and queens of Britain from William the Conqueror through the Stuarts, including the specific 13 days that Lady Jane Grey was queen.  Serious overkill.  I recently took some refresher courses at the community college level since there had been such a large break between undergrad and grad schooling for me, and from what I experienced there it seems that the focus is moving away from factual history to a more social history.  I can't really speak for what happens in public schools, but I hope it's following the same way.  I would rather my kids understand the causes and effects of the Civil War and the effect on our people, even if they only know that it happened "sometime in the mid-1800s", rather than them know that it occurred exactly between 1861-1865 and understand nothing of its impact on the average American and how it impacted our way of life and government.  I seriously hope things are a-changing.  DD1 is only going into 2nd grade this fall, so my experience is limited in that area.

[CatsCradle]

Originally Posted by ramama 

Ain't that the truth!  I had a college professor (Medieval and Renaissance literature) who required us to memorize the reigns of all the kings and queens of Britain from William the Conqueror through the Stuarts, including the specific 13 days that Lady Jane Grey was queen.  Serious overkill.  I recently took some refresher courses at the community college level since there had been such a large break between undergrad and grad schooling for me, and from what I experienced there it seems that the focus is moving away from factual history to a more social history.  I can't really speak for what happens in public schools, but I hope it's following the same way.  I would rather my kids understand the causes and effects of the Civil War and the effect on our people, even if they only know that it happened "sometime in the mid-1800s", rather than them know that it occurred exactly between 1861-1865 and understand nothing of its impact on the average American and how it impacted our way of life and government.  I seriously hope things are a-changing.  DD1 is only going into 2nd grade this fall, so my experience is limited in that area.

Well, that's the difference between a good history professor and a mediocre history professor in my opinion! (bolded part) I had history teachers in high school and college who were compassionate about the "whys."  Why was Lady Jane only queen for 13 days?  Because of the political  climate of that age.  She lost her head because of that climate and it will forever be ingrained into my mind.  I really do think it is about the passions of certain professors and teachers.  I mean, you can know all the facts, but if you aren't passionate about the whys then it is pretty much just information, not teaching of values, emotions, climates and the such.  I think my personal education was a series of fortunate accidents.  I just had professors and teachers who cared about what they did and the message they conveyed.  My college history professor is now deceased, and when I heard about it I got extremely emotional...not because I really knew about him as a person, but because he let me see into his mind and heart.  I find that the most intriguing part of education...the teachers who teach because they are passionate about their craft and subject.  

[cyberfish]

I think with all the standardized testing in the schools our students are losing the ability to think creatively.  I don't know if this is a school or a culture problem.  I teach college students, and a lot of the "good" students are used to being told exactly what to learn for the test and exactly what they need to do to earn an A.  Often when I ask my students to think about a problem that may not have a right or wrong answer, but requires some analysis and interpretation based on what they know, they can't do it and/or they freak out.  And these are bright individuals.  

I think we need to stop putting so much value and emphasis on test scores and start teaching kids how to think, not what to think.  But people like results that are quantifiable and standardized test scores deliver on that count.  I think the recent scandal in Atlanta highlights some of the issues inherent in high stakes testing. 

Perhaps as a culture we should define a body of knowledge students should have by the time they reach the age of, say, 16, and worry less about if children are at the same exact level year to year and grade to grade. 

[captain optimism]

While I agree with you about the foolish badness of high-stakes testing, the inability of college students to adjust to learning material that is open to interpretation may be a developmental issue. I am kicking myself that I can't find the book title now, but when I used to teach college a friend gave me an old book from Harvard in the 1960s that theorized about the developmental stages of young adults' intellect. 

Ha! Found it thanks to Google. It was Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years, published back in 1970. Wikipedia has an article summarizing it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Perry

I'm sure others have debunked and/or fine-tuned these theories, but the main thing that jumps out is how college students in the 1960s were unable to deal with material open to interpretation--and we can think of their education as pre-lapsarian. 

Originally Posted by cyberfish 

I think with all the standardized testing in the schools our students are losing the ability to think creatively.  I don't know if this is a school or a culture problem.  I teach college students, and a lot of the "good" students are used to being told exactly what to learn for the test and exactly what they need to do to earn an A.  Often when I ask my students to think about a problem that may not have a right or wrong answer, but requires some analysis and interpretation based on what they know, they can't do it and/or they freak out.  And these are bright individuals.  

I think we need to stop putting so much value and emphasis on test scores and start teaching kids how to think, not what to think.  But people like results that are quantifiable and standardized test scores deliver on that count.  I think the recent scandal in Atlanta highlights some of the issues inherent in high stakes testing. 

Perhaps as a culture we should define a body of knowledge students should have by the time they reach the age of, say, 16, and worry less about if children are at the same exact level year to year and grade to grade. 

[captain optimism]

This is the reason I would give for the problems in US education: a general lack of resources. There's almost no evidence for making all decisions about students based on standardized testing, but when we don't have the money to pay highly-qualified teachers to staff classes with a decent teacher-student ratio, standardized tests seem like an attractive way to industrialize and teacher-proof education. At the same time, when many students don't have access to books and libraries, and are physically at risk in the school building, how can they achieve anything?  

My SIL has been teaching in a school where the students don't have access to books. She wrote a grant so that the children in her class would get some books. One of our local school systems has a program in Italian language instruction, because someone in the district went to get money from the Italian government. That's very embarrassing, really. It's only going to get worse because of the housing bubble--the combination of schools and municipalities investing in junk bonds, foreclosures decreasing the size of student populations, and the general downturn in property values (since many schools are funded through property taxes)--it's all made of lose. 

The whole school reform bs is coming out of a desire to pretend that you can get the same results in all schools even if the students are very poor and the teachers are all relatively inexperienced and standing in front of huge classes. 

Originally Posted by sosurreal09 

I may have an interesting take on all of this. I grew up in a poor area and am only 23 y/o now so my experience is pretty fresh still.

Our school system sucked. We didn't even have homework in HS b/c we couldn't take the books home...but we had security guards in every hallway...everyone acted out all the time. There were 3 stabbings in my 4 years there. It was ridiculous.

In 10th grade I got into the voc that was a part of this school. It completely changed my life. The ONLY kids who had any drive were the kids in voc. 

[meemee]

you know one other thing that i notice with other countries we admire - teachers get a freer hand in their classroom than they get here. i am not sure if they are held accountable, but they have much more input about the needs of the child. they are trusted for instance to define the curriculum of the class, doing the differentiation to help all the different levels of the students. 

[EFmom]

I think that trying to paint public schools with a broad brush is ridiculous.  There are bad public schools, for sure, but there are also excellent public schools.  So when I hear the hyperbole about our failing schools, I roll my eyes.

That said, I do think that most of the problems in education are societal problems, that no amount of standardized testing or teacher blaming is going to fix.  We currently have the largest income gap in modern history in the US.  That, in and of itself, is hugely problematic.  And given that schools are funded largely through local school taxes, it's not surprising that some schools struggle.

I also think there are parental and family issues that are very problematic.  We live in a culture where anti-intellectualism is glorified.  If a kid's parents don't value education, chances are good that he won't, and if he isn't sent to school ready to learn if he is sent to school at all, there's not much a teacher can do. 

The standardized testing is a farce.  The tests themselves don't measure student achievement or school performance.  They are a political tool, manipulated to give the aggregate results that are politically desired.  A great book on the subject is Phillip Harris's "The Myths of Standardized Tests: Why They Don't Tell You What You Think They Do."

I have nothing against vocational education, but I don't think it's a panacea, either.  In the past, vocational programs could educate students to be skilled workers in a largely manufacturing economy, where there were ample jobs that paid pretty well and could be used to support a family.  Those jobs just don't exist.  Most decently paid positions require a college degree.  Whether you really need the degree to do the job or not doesn't matter if the employer isn't going to hire you in the first place.

 

[ramama]

Originally Posted by EFmom 

I think that trying to paint public schools with a broad brush is ridiculous.  There are bad public schools, for sure, but there are also excellent public schools.  So when I hear the hyperbole about our failing schools, I roll my eyes.

That said, I do think that most of the problems in education are societal problems, that no amount of standardized testing or teacher blaming is going to fix.  We currently have the largest income gap in modern history in the US.  That, in and of itself, is hugely problematic.  And given that schools are funded largely through local school taxes, it's not surprising that some schools struggle.

I also think there are parental and family issues that are very problematic.  We live in a culture where anti-intellectualism is glorified.  If a kid's parents don't value education, chances are good that he won't, and if he isn't sent to school ready to learn if he is sent to school at all, there's not much a teacher can do. 

The standardized testing is a farce.  The tests themselves don't measure student achievement or school performance.  They are a political tool, manipulated to give the aggregate results that are politically desired.  A great book on the subject is Phillip Harris's "The Myths of Standardized Tests: Why They Don't Tell You What You Think They Do."

I have nothing against vocational education, but I don't think it's a panacea, either.  In the past, vocational programs could educate students to be skilled workers in a largely manufacturing economy, where there were ample jobs that paid pretty well and could be used to support a family.  Those jobs just don't exist.  Most decently paid positions require a college degree.  Whether you really need the degree to do the job or not doesn't matter if the employer isn't going to hire you in the first place.

I agree.  The problem I see with public schools is not that some are bad and some are good, just that there is such a wide difference in the first place.  Some consistency would be nice :)  I think on this a lot, and the vocational thing was just something my brain grasped onto at that moment, but really I think it's a cultural problem.  Now, how do we fix that?

[lindberg99]

Originally Posted by One_Girl 

It would be nice if kids could get both the education and a vocation that would serve them in the real world.  I think it would be very possible if teachers were trained to teach the important skills and material from textbooks and leave the rest alone.  I remember memorizing so much nonsense material in school that had no practical use in the real world and when I was going to college I had a professor talk about how wonderful she was for having her students memorize the names of all the rivers in Egypt.  I think cultural knowledge and understanding how geography shapes civilization is important, but teachers go about it in such long drawn out way that by the time you get to talking about how the rivers shaped the geography the children are daydreaming about recess because they thought that memorizing the river names for the test was the important information.  There are many subjects where teachers draw the topic out to death before getting to the point and if they could concisely make their point, or better yet guide the students into discovering the point, they could get a lot more done, students would understand that there was a point to the subjects they were forced to study in school, and there would be time for teaching practical skills.  It would be nice to be able to go to school for 13 years to be prepared for more than a job at McDonalds or school for 13 more years before you can hopefully have a secure job with insurance. 

Our school system has a "career center" where kids can go for their jr and sr years. They can come out with the training to go into field like dental assisting, being an LPN, welding, construction, mechanics, cosmetology, etc. Their website said that 54% go on after graduating to college, tech school or some other training so I guess they must be able to get the college prereqs if they want to have that as an option.

[serenbat]

Our school system has a "career center" where kids can go for their jr and sr years. They can come out with the training to go into field like dental assisting, being an LPN, welding, construction, mechanics, cosmetology, etc. Their website said that 54% go on after graduating to college, tech school or some other training so I guess they must be able to get the college prereqs if they want to have that as an option.

sadly my area does not do this- it's one or the other! even some schools given only certain diplomas 

ex. so you have lots (the biggest group) of cosmetology students and the area can only support so many and they lack the skills need to go to college and thus don't have business skills and they end up doing something else because of the overflow

students are really pushed (in my area) do this or that in HS and it's an all or nothing- no long term planning as to the need for a certain careers 

so many spend tons of money (they don't have) needing to go to local community colleges to make up for what the missed doing  vo-schooling and than they can try and get in another college- time and money later many don't benefit from it

the only real help it offers is for an LPN- they are needed (in my area) but again, so many lack basic HS classes due to the amount of time the spend training to be an LPN that they stay in the field

as far as technical skills, because of state requirements many must get additional training that the vo-school programs do not offer and they have to go to tech-schools in order to meet state testing-kind of misleading and I wonder about the states that you listed what it really means? is it because they can't do it all in the program offered thru the HS school?

I'm not going to get into what is causing this issue- to me it really is clear--my area, as if more is even needed my state just announced state wide testing scandal and so many schools are in my area-not a surprise at all

I have a friend who lives in another state and it is a whole other world-doesn't even compare to what we are deal with here.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by EFmom 

I think that trying to paint public schools with a broad brush is ridiculous.  There are bad public schools, for sure, but there are also excellent public schools.  So when I hear the hyperbole about our failing schools, I roll my eyes.

That said, I do think that most of the problems in education are societal problems, that no amount of standardized testing or teacher blaming is going to fix.  We currently have the largest income gap in modern history in the US. 

I really agree with this. I would take it a step further. I think the same school can be good for one child and bad for another. Our local public high school is a considered a good school. All the little stats are positive. There is a real sense of community -- the football games are attended by people in the neighborhood who don't have kids there yet.  My neighbor's granddaughter graduated from there a couple of years ago and is now on a full scholarship to an ivy league school.

But for some kids, it's not a good fit. My kids go to a small private K-12 school, and last year in October a boy transferred from the public high school because he was getting in fights all the time. He later revealed to his friends that he had been having thoughts of killing himself.  

Same school -- different kids -- different experience.

____________________________________________

The standardize testing thing is just .....

One of my DD's friend's Dad is a highschool English teacher on the other side at town at a school where most kids speak Spanish as their first language, and some are recent arrivals into the US and speak very little English. He said that many of his students aren't literate in Spanish, either. Those kids take the same test as the kids on my end of town.  It is completely beyond me how anyone could compare the scores of the two schools and declare the other school a "failing" school. It's so obviously not a far comparison.