More time to serve me my little clay minds. BWHAHAHAHAHA.

-Professor Lobamaty

P.S. Liked the last song you did but can we crank in some Van Halen covers next time? Thanks.

"hmm, my constitution says this is a local or state matter "

And yet the Departmet of Education exists. How is that possible? The fact that something is unconstitutional will not stop them from doing whatever they want. Governments not only derived their just powers from the concent of the governed, they also derive their UNJUST powers from the concent of the governed. The American people don't care about the Constitution. We will see in November 2010 how serious the Tea Party people are judging by the number of votes going to third parties.

On topic, once in a while people talk about having year-round schools, but nothing ever comes of it. I doubt it'll be different this time around.

I wonder how the tourism industry will react to this? In Michigan they used to start school before labor day. It was changed and now it starts after Labor Day. One of the reasons was pressure from Big Tourism.

The American people don't care about the Constitution. We will see in November 2010 how serious the Tea Party people are judging by the number of votes going to third parties.

On topic, once in a while people talk about having year-round schools, but nothing ever comes of it. I doubt it'll be different this time around.

#2 | Posted by member2586

Wrangel -gone
Pelosi - gone
Reid -gone
Specter -gone
Durbin -gone

and elect "real" blue dog dems to replace "faux" dogs

re; GOP . .

McCain - gone
McConnel -gone
Grahm - gone
Bohner -gone
etc, etc

There already are Year Round Schools in Chicago.

You guys on the right can't see that he just told Randi Weingarten and the UFT to take a walk? You should be happy that he's shitting on another segment of his base.

you know, i love that you guys trot out the constitution even in things that are in and of themselves really good ideas.

Summer break is an anachronism of 100 years ago.
Once again it will be pointed out that we are the only industrialized nation that still blindly clings to this tradition.

one thing that this would make much easier is relieving the cost of daycare for children too young to take care of themselves once school is out for the year. Kids also have been demonstrated to slide backward when left to their own devices for the summer. not to mention the last month of school which in general is a fluff month, and the first month of school which is all review trying to get the kids to remember the stuff that was covered at the end of the last year.

But hey, the constitution doesn't say anything about it so clearly we don't want to change a broken and pointless system.

For the record, I think this is something that needs to be openly discussed.

You know I believe extending the school year for ALL year would make a lot of teachers cranky teachers thereby creating a hostile learning environment. Teachers need breaks just like students do.

Larry

"you know, i love that you guys trot out the constitution even in things that are in and of themselves really good ideas."

I wonder if the founding fathers would stick to their ideological positions if they were around today to see how inconceivably different the world is compared to the world out of which their ideologies arose.

Would this mean fewer children and teenagers at parks, beaches, campgrounds, 7-11's, etc., during summer? If so, it's a great idea.

You know I believe extending the school year for ALL year would make a lot of teachers cranky teachers thereby creating a hostile learning environment. Teachers need breaks just like students do.
#9 | Posted by LarryMohr

There would be more frequent breaks of shorter duration, LM. The problem arises when you take 10 weeks off at a clip. Like Valisk said upthread, a ten month school year is really like less than 8 when the last month of the year is basically worthless because kids have already gone into vacation mode, and the first month of the next year is reminding kids of what they'd forgotten the previous year.

But wouldn't that also reduce the money spent upon tourism Nullifidian?? I mean many places rely upon the tourism dollars generated by the family going on summer vacations. If Jr and Jrette is in school during the summer it would be a huge crimp in their families travels.

Larry

Damn too complicated for Me HC. Wowzer.

If so, it's a great idea.
#11 | Posted by nullifidian

LOL. I guess I can appreciate that, but you really are a kranky old bastard, nulli.

"But wouldn't that also reduce the money spent upon tourism Nullifidian?? I mean many places rely upon the tourism dollars generated by the family going on summer vacations. If Jr and Jrette is in school during the summer it would be a huge crimp in their families travels."

No, because there would not be less time off, only shorter periods of time off. Kids would still get their 10 weeks + off a year, it just wouldn't be entirely during the summer.

The only fallout would be for the summer camp industry.

As Hag says, make the school year longer and have more breaks, each shorter in duration. Net gain in days; no 10-week breaks. Oughtta wreak havoc on sports schedules and parent vacation plans.

Oh, and pay teachers more. And expect more subs to be needed, as teachers will need to take courses during the school year for relicensure (requirements set by the state). I know a good many educators who think this is a marvelous idea. And no, I don't think teachers' unions would get in the way, as long as pay rates go up.

Show us a proposal! : )

Of course, as noted, this is a state issue. They can put pressure on, but minimum numbers of student days are already determined state by state. There's a five-day difference between the state I live in and the state I work in. WTF, right?

Would this mean fewer children and teenagers at parks, beaches, campgrounds, 7-11's, etc., during summer? If so, it's a great idea.

It'll jack your property and state tax rates. you've never been very happy about how those without kids subsidize those who do. To have this would be more of the same in that regard.

I posted on this topic before.

I think there should be a significant amount of time off, perhaps a month in total, but I think the educational system should have more time and that time should not simply be used to extend the school year but to have a kind of summer program/camp, etc. that is required for all students.

It should be 24 hrs per week for 4-6 weeks, with activities such as projects, field trips or community service.

In other words kids should be involved in educational programs that integrate them with the community and each other (cross grades, perhaps) and allows them to apply or see the application of what fact based information has been taught during the year.

Student should have tasks to accomplish, but there should not be rigorous grading systems.
Kids could opt to focus on projects/programs/trips/
community service in line with their individual activities.

Done in the right way, many kids would love it. Parents too.

you've never been very happy about how those without kids subsidize those who do

You mean null doesn't mind an uneducated society as long as he doesn't have to pay taxes for it?

Though I am an empty nester, school taxes are close to being the only taxes I don't mind paying. Education is everything

Now HC why would You go on vacation if You had to suddenly rush back home?? Besides many people need vacations from their vacation. Why fuck up a good thing.

Larry

"It'll jack your property and state tax rates."

I'd rather not subsidize your satanic spawn, Eberly, but if that's what it takes to keep them out of sight and out of mind...

I'd rather not subsidize your satanic spawn,

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-09-27 10:17 PM | Reply | Flag: wants an uneducated society that can more easily be subjugated and put on welfare

I'd rather not subsidize your satanic spawn, Eberly, but if that's what it takes to keep them out of sight and out of mind...

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-09-27 10:17 PM

And I'll bet you're the only guy on your block yellling "Bah, humbug!" every Christmas too. : )

Summer break is an anachronism of 100 years ago.
Valsilk--

This is true--summer vacation was tied to harvesting the fields--when our economy was 89% agriculture.

"In other words kids should be involved in educational programs that integrate them with the community and each other (cross grades, perhaps) and allows them to apply or see the application of what fact based information has been taught during the year. "

Great stuff, Grendel! The devil is in the details. (Of course, I think school should be done more like this anyway, or in parts like this--and I'm in the damned system.) And as you plan this for your legislature : ) , consider cost--chaperones or leaders, not necessarily teachers, but it'd be hard to do all-volunteer unless companies let employees out for the work. But you know, great way to integrate community with school, which should be the point...

"Though I am an empty nester, school taxes are close to being the only taxes I don't mind paying. Education is everything"

I like that, Goat--close to. I'm guessing that's just 'cause nobody likes paying taxes; we always mind.

And by the by, for those interested, there are plenty of ways to save money in the current system without cutting teachers or teacher salaries... Look at a school budget one day. Ye gods. Talk about bureaucracies.

And yet the Departmet of Education exists. How is that possible? member

They are now going to run the student loan industry--don't ya' know?

The DoE's gonna run it? Honestly?

Yup--Obama announced it.

And I agree with your school budget thing--

For the DoE story--

Our school calendar is based upon the agrarian economy and not too many of our kids are working the fields today,"
Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a recent interview with The Associated Press . . .

Thanks, Murphy. I had read/heard about the hoo-ra, but I had not followed closely enough to know it was about the DoE taking over. Not sure how I feel about that. Don't care enough right now to get into it.

But... Markh--what do you mean? Where do you live? Do you really see majorities of students working literally in the fields, on the farms? Jesus, does anybody work the big farms? Much mechanized, no? I can tell you that in northern Maine, potato country, there used to be serious shutdowns and serious numbers of kids pullin' them taters. But from what I read this year, not the case anymore--they still do the shutdown (with permission from the state, which likely could still happen), but not so many kids are doin' the pullin'. Besides, y'all might as well chill on this one. The idea has been around for decades. Do you think Arne fucking Duncan is really gonna be the guy to pull it together? I doubt it. At the same time, really? You're gonna say that the economic part outweighs the educational benefit and our ability to compete globally? Seriously, this isn't about doing like the Europeans and Asians; it's about looking at how they do school. For those who like to quote the international tests, well, shit, here's a way to bring us closer. (I'm not saying that it's not a real economic issue for kids and families. Most of my students work to pay for their lives or to supplement family incomes, and they start as early as state law allows.)

I'd rather not subsidize your satanic spawn,

#22 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-09-27 10:17 PM | Reply | Flag: Too cheap to buy a $3 bag of candy for the kids at Halloween, too

This is an idea I can actually get behind.

Gobama! And I'm not being sarcastic this time!

Obama wants longer school year: ALL YEAR

He wants those kids singing about him even in the summer.

I'm familiar with year-round school in Euroipe, Japan, the Philippines and now Taiwan, and I think it works great.

Kids and teachers get more breaks, but shorter ones throughout the year. Then, during the summer everyone gets two or even three weeks off.

Seeing as how most family vacations are only for 4-5 days, three weeks is plenty of time for several trips. Plus there are long weekends for day trips.

Here in Taiwan summer school focuses on enrichment -- a break from the routine.

Seriously, most American kids sit around the house all day watching TV

"He wants those kids singing about him even in the summer."

Now you're just trolling! And Celisary isn't even on this thread!

"Seriously, most American kids sit around the house all day watching TV"

That's an assumption, and not even a great one. Got some stats on that, pal? I'm all for criticizing lazy Americans, but most? Most? I know _plenty_ of kids who are quite active and engaged in multiple activities outside the home all summer long. The number of TV addicts I know is actually quite small.

Oh look. Republicans advocating america remaining behind in education.

Anti school?

Haha not suprised.

Year round school has been proven to be better as it keeps the child engaged all year.

You still have three months of vacation. Just spread out over the year.

Keep the people stupid or they might leave the repub party.

I am suprised that a few of the R's are for this though. With all the knee jerk anti obama responses.

Its good to know some ARE thinking.

I am suprised that a few of the R's are for this though. With all the knee jerk anti obama responses.

Its good to know some ARE thinking.

Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-28 05:48 AM | Reply

It's a switch isn't it??

I am suprised that a few of the R's are for this though.

I don't see how the length of the school year is a political issue.

I think there should be school throughout the summer. Just not in the harshest months of winter. Imagine kids not freezing their asses off waiting for the bus.

6 weeks on, 2 weeks off, or something of that nature. I'm a teacher, and I think it'd work GREAT.

Other countries aren't smart because they have a longer school year. They are smart because they are pushed into a curriculum in which they learn higher level classes that our children aren't exposed to until their high school years. When they are at a young age their minds suck everything up like a sponge, but as you get older it gets harder to remember most of the stuff you were taught.

"I think there should be school throughout the summer. Just not in the harshest months of winter. Imagine kids not freezing their asses off waiting for the bus."

Well, you could make the same argument against summer. ; )

"Other countries aren't smart because they have a longer school year. They are smart because they are pushed into a curriculum in which they learn higher level classes that our children aren't exposed to until their high school years. When they are at a young age their minds suck everything up like a sponge, but as you get older it gets harder to remember most of the stuff you were taught."

Maybe. It's also because in Asian countries, kids are more generally held to higher standards _by parents_. And because the culture itself honors education. (And part of your premise appears wrong--kids are pushed into higher-level math sooner and sooner. Algebra in middle school? Not when I was a kid. There are some ways in which we do better, challenge more deeply, than we did 20-30 years ago. There are some ways in which we don't. Also, some higher-level work, if it's higher-cognitive level, is harder to do at lower ages because the mind isn't there yet. But I don't want to go all "soft science" on anybody...)

It's not as simple as more months in school, but that's a good idea. As long as you pay teachers more. : ) (Think of it like subcontracting--the more jobs you take, the more money you make; the longer the job you bid on, the higher the bid.)

What I'd like to see is deeper engagement by (and with) parents and a cultural shift. How to do that is anyone's guess.

"Well, you could make the same argument against summer. ; )"

I've heard arguments back when I was in high school that it would be cost prohibitive to air condition schools throughout the summer.

"I've heard arguments back when I was in high school that it would be cost prohibitive to air condition schools throughout the summer."

Exactly. So what do you do? Of course, in our building, built 8 years ago, the original plans called for air conditioning, but the budget committee kept cutting away and cutting away, and now it is prohibitively expensive. And too, we could just fucking deal. : ) (Says the guy who melts when it's above 80.)

How about simply putting the cirriculum on disc, and sending it home with kids? Or offering a link to a site with live conferencing? They have all summer to complete the programs. The schools won't need to staff as much during the summer. Seems like a no brainer as opposed to keeping schools open year round.

I know _plenty_ of kids who are quite active and engaged in multiple activities outside the home all summer long. The number of TV addicts I know is actually quite small.

#37 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-28 05:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Got some stats on that pal? Or does your personal, isolated anecdotal information cover it?

It's got nothing to do with being a TV addict, but a lot to do with working parents who don't want their kids wandering the neighborhood.

Maybe the rich Liberals you know send their kids to science camp and music camp. Most parents struggle to pay the bills. You don't want working class families to have comparable opportunities?

"But millions of others are loitering in parking lots and shopping malls, cruising iffy websites, and slouching toward academic disaster. For this second group, it's time to take a fresh look at the traditional summer break. "

Prag, I have a friend who is a teacher in inner city Atlanta and he has told me that almost half the kids have no interest in learning material and when he calls parents to explain their child is disruptive the parents curse at him and tell him it's not their child's fault.

"Most parents struggle to pay the bills."

And they thought it was responsible of them to have children? That bothers me.

I think this is a great idea, though I'm glad I'm already out of school and got to enjoy all those long summers playing video games, backyard football, and hanging out with friends.

That said, I think this should be a state discussion, not a federal government one.

Oh, and I fucking hate kids, so I'm with Null on this one; the more time they're stuck in class and at home doing homework, the better.

"Got some stats on that pal? Or does your personal, isolated anecdotal information cover it?"

I don't need stats. _You_ made the assertion that most kids were blah blah blah. I was talking about _my experience_ and clearly stated it as such.

"It's got nothing to do with being a TV addict, but a lot to do with working parents who don't want their kids wandering the neighborhood. "

Huh? But you said... "Seriously, most American kids sit around the house all day watching TV" Nice attempt to turn it around on me. I was clearly stating _my experience_. YOU were painting with a broad brush. Now I know why they call you vermin.

"Maybe the rich Liberals you know send their kids to science camp and music camp. Most parents struggle to pay the bills. You don't want working class families to have comparable opportunities?"

Hey, how about this: FUCK OFF. Why do you assume anything about rich liberals? I teach in a poor high school in a mostly poor town (vastly working class, little wealth). I'm talking about regular kids who have lives beyond television. Lots of them. They're not rich--they're engaged: sports, family, community, work. Even though you see "undesirables" hanging out downtown, it's not the majority.

"But millions of others are loitering in parking lots and shopping malls, cruising iffy websites, and slouching toward academic disaster. For this second group, it's time to take a fresh look at the traditional summer break. "
www.washingtonpost.com

And did you miss the part where I say we _should_ have school all summer long? Wow. Again, reading comprehension; reading comprehension; reading comprehension. Say it with me. Reading. Comprehension.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
!!!!!!!!
-sPud

School all year is a fantastic idea, these little fatties need to be learning all year, not sitting on their over sized asses playing retarded rockstar video games and the like, these little turds forget half their lessons over the summer vacation any way.

The US education system is very weak, and more about the teachers than preparing students for the working world. The teachers need to work a full year for their full year of pay, not half a year for a full year of pay as the system is now, these teachers are a load of entitled, whiny crybabies hiding behind a union holding the children hostage to their greedy gimme, gimme mindset. Hey teach,If you want high pay do not go into a low paying profession.

Teachers need breaks just like students do. -- #9 | Posted by LarryMohr

What I hear from el-hi teachers most is that they need a reduction in contact hours -- i.e., less time in the classroom and more time for prep and grading. Switching from a 9-month to 12-month work year might give them the leverage they need to get that.

#58 is one of the funnier posts I've read since I've been back, wolfie. Thank you.

School all year is a fantastic idea, these little fatties need to be learning all year, not sitting on their over sized asses playing retarded rockstar video games and the like, these little turds forget half their lessons over the summer vacation any way.

The US education system is very weak, and more about the teachers than preparing students for the working world. The teachers need to work a full year for their full year of pay, not half a year for a full year of pay as the system is now, these teachers are a load of entitled, whiny crybabies hiding behind a union holding the children hostage to their greedy gimme, gimme mindset. Hey teach,If you want high pay do not go into a low paying profession.

#58 | Posted by warwolf at 2009-09-28 10:48 AM

I've heard arguments back when I was in high school that it would be cost prohibitive to air condition schools throughout the summer.

actually many schools in my area started school later this Fall and are only going 4 days a week for those reasons......limited funding.

A friend of mine who lives in a Denver Suburb told me that most schools in his area go year round now.

You people are fuckin' hilarious. ; )

Constitutionally speaking, this should be a state, not government, decision. Just another of Obamas'gradual push's toward socialism. Unilateral decisions. Granted, kids nowdays don't have to help on the farm, but they do need some down time and so do the teachers. My daughter is a senior this year. She is a straight A/B student in all her AP classes, at a full time gifted Florida school. She works hard. She and most of her friends in her gifted school, as well friends in other area non-gifted schools, have barely had enough time since the end of middle school, for any social life. They start at 7am and some don't leave until 4pm. Then, there are extracirricular activities, homework to be done, dinner, then time to shower and get to bed. But Obama thinks they need longer days! Give me break! I'm just glad my child is graduating this year. At least she had a childhood that included happy summer vacation memories. And had teachers, who were refreshed after a much needed break, and ready to tackle the new school year. Thanks to Obamas' plan, future kids may not have that luxury. This is just another gradual push, by Obama, away from democracy and towards a dictatorship. At least I can complain about the guy, for I did not vote for him.

My nieces in Georgia go to school year round, have been for about 5 years I think. Fucking Obama wanted them to start that 5 years ago so they could be brainwashed when he was president and no one would ever suspect it.

Blue states go year round while red states don't. Let us see who is better off in 30 years.

Probably thanks to the great organizer, Obama, during his time in Chi-town.

"Constitutionally speaking, this should be a state, not government, decision. Just another of Obamas'gradual push's toward socialism. Unilateral decisions. Granted, kids nowdays don't have to help on the farm, but they do need some down time and so do the teachers. My daughter is a senior this year. She is a straight A/B student in all her AP classes, at a full time gifted Florida school. She works hard. She and most of her friends in her gifted school, as well friends in other area non-gifted schools, have barely had enough time since the end of middle school, for any social life. They start at 7am and some don't leave until 4pm. Then, there are extracirricular activities, homework to be done, dinner, then time to shower and get to bed. But Obama thinks they need longer days! Give me break! I'm just glad my child is graduating this year. At least she had a childhood that included happy summer vacation memories. And had teachers, who were refreshed after a much needed break, and ready to tackle the new school year. Thanks to Obamas' plan, future kids may not have that luxury. This is just another gradual push, by Obama, away from democracy and towards a dictatorship. At least I can complain about the guy, for I did not vote for him."

This is too funny, on many levels.

Let's see, the Department of Ed was started when? NCLB, the largest endeavor by the DoE probably ever, was passed under which president? (Yes, yes, I know, Dem majority, but...)

Oh, and not _longer days_; _more days._ Nobody's talking abotu longer days.

And btw, AP classes are the dream of publishing companies and testing companies. Talk about teaching to the test--ye gods. (I'm not saying your daughter's not brilliant; but I am saying it's not about brilliance, necessarily.)

And notice that your entire anecdote is about a school for gifted kids. What about the rest of them?

I think it's scary and hilarious that people see a move toward more education as something socialistic. Education should be a nonpartisan discussion. A rising tide and all that.

I think it's scary and hilarious that people see a move toward more education as something socialistic. Education should be a nonpartisan discussion. A rising tide and all that.

I think that there are probably some specific agendas for education that would be "socialistic" but you can't suggest that everything Obama does regarding education as being "socialistic". the goal of improving education, like you say, should be non partisan.

If Obama had come out with "no child left behind" that would get lambasted as being "socialistic".

LOL

Hard to believe anyone could be against becoming better educated and more competitive in the world.

Hard to believe anyone could be against becoming better educated and more competitive in the world.
#69 | Posted by morris

Depressing to concede the point, but it shouldn't be hard to believe. I mean, this is the U.S. of A., right?

I think this is a good idea, so long as the extra time is used for new angles of education and not the same old shit that isn't working. It wouldn't hurt for students to get a basic understanding of real life concepts such as leases, insurance, building trades, mortgages, etc. You know, shit they can use. When's the last time a kid from the hood needed to know something he learned in trigonometry?

Kids should be able to drop out any time they like. Make room for the kids who want to study. If you don't maintain a c average, you get booted for a semester--come back when/if you get serious. Take all the time to "chill with your friends" you like. Education is a priviledge. Forcing children to go to school until they are 16, allows them to take it for granted. Boot the slackers, and upgrade the education level for those who want to learn.

When's the last time a kid from the hood needed to know something he learned in trigonometry?
#71 | Posted by JOE

You didn't have to go that far, Joe.

I don't get the people who are talking about the kids being fatasses and more school somehow helping the situation.

Were you losers more physically active at school -where you sit on your ass 80% of the time - than you were during your days off as kids?

If anything, more time at school would just make fat kids fatter.

"If Obama had come out with "no child left behind" that would get lambasted as being "socialistic"."

Great point, Eb! And I'm glad it was _you_ who made it. : )

And education, Bob, is not a privilege in our society--it's a right and a duty. Though I hear your point. But there are other issues with that. Dropping out is a huge issue in our world.... And it does almost no one any good. Notice that I said almost.

Our school calendar is based upon the agrarian economy and not too many of our kids are working the fields today," Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a recent interview with The Associated Press...

The reason many school districts site for not teaching year round in current times has to do with a lack of proper air conditioning, especially in the southern U.S.

While I think year-round school is a good idea there will be an enormous cost to upgrade HVAC.

If anything, more time at school would just make fat kids fatter.

#74 | Posted by Sully

Entirely different proximity to the refrigerator.

Who is going to pay to fit all the schools in the midwest and east coast that do not currently have air conditioning? Students and teachers are not going to sit in 80 to 90 degree class rooms all summer long? If they do, how much teaching/learing will really take place?

Oh, wait; what was I thinking. The Democrats are in office. This is another opportunity for the traditional TAX AND SPEND mentallity, which we are all embracing these days. Yes, more taxes... Excellent! Go Obama!!
:-(

I am not going to read 79 posts, so forgive me if this has already been said, but this is not a new concept and one many educators have pushed for, for a while.

Nicely done, Kanrei. And just how far do you think this plan will get? : )

Oh, but by not reading you're missing a chance to see some truly asinine behavior! (Oh, never mind; you've been a DR denizen for a long time... : ) )

IT will get as far as it always does due to hysteria such as I am sure is in this thread. I actually agree with the educator's point of view in that 9 months on and 3 off is not good for continuing education and reinforcement of ideas.

If this were implemented, I'd be interested to see what happens when the teachers' unions all demand a pay increase for having to work through the summer. As I understand it, most public school teachers are paid an annual salary, and can choose to receive it all in 9 months, or have their checks spread over 12 months (and get paid all summer). In the latter case, since they are already being paid for a year of work, do they deserve to be paid more for actually having to show up?

In the latter case, since they are already being paid for a year of work, do they deserve to be paid more for actually having to show up?

No because the 3 months off would still be there, only spread out through the year rather than one clump. It would still be 180 days of school, but on a different schedule.

We're not being paid for a year of work. We're being paid for a set number of days. It's like being a contractor--you can get paid all at once, half upfront and half after, in thirds, whatever.

So yes, teachers would have to be paid more because we'd be working more days--our gig would get longer, just like a contractor takes into account how long a job will last when he or she bids on it.

And btw, the school year is much closer to 10 months than to 9 months these days (kinda like a pregnancy).

Oh, Prag would know better being a teacher and all.

Were you losers more physically active at school -where you sit on your ass 80% of the time - than you were during your days off as kids?

If anything, more time at school would just make fat kids fatter.

#74 | Posted by Sully at 2009-09-28 01:15 PM | Flag: Sat on his ass during PE

Ah, Kanrei, I rather liked the way you put it--nice and concise.

And it means more coming from someone who's not a teacher. Education critics will just say I'm being defensive or protecting my own or whatever.

"Flag: Sat on his ass during PE"

LOL. What an idiot. Is this tired schtick suppose to pass for clever?

First of all, I said kids sit on their asses 80% of the day at school. Do you think just maybe the other 20% I set aside was for recess and PE?

Secondly, if you really think that normal kids get most of their exercise during PE, then you weren't a normal kid.

You're just being defensive, and protecting your own.

LOL. What an idiot. Is this tired schtick suppose to pass for clever?

#89 | Posted by Sully at 2009-09-28 03:04 PM

#74 | Posted by Sully at 2009-09-28 01:15 PM | Flag: Sat on his ass during PE

I slept on the leg press in the back of the weight room for the better part of the last two years of school.

I can still remember the gym teacher, Mr. Anis (no joke) screaming at me in his gravelly coaches voice from the door.... "Celiiine!!! WTF are you doing back there?!! Wake TF up, Celine!"

I did a lot of detentions for that, but I got to sleep there too.

#92 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-09-28 03:17 PM

"No more clever or idiotic than suggesting that school makes kids fat."

I was responding to the notion that putting them in school for more time is "getting them off their fat asses" as expressed earlier in the thread. In reality, kids spend less time on their asses when they aren't in school. So to the extent that kids are fat because they sit on their asses, putting them in school more would make them fatter. Can't get around that they spend most of the day at school on their butts.

"I slept on the leg press in the back of the weight room for the better part of the last two years of school."

We had kids like that. In my school, they always had gym clothes that were all black. For stupid sports like tennis, my friends and I would square off with them. They liked us because we didn't keep score and spent most the time chasing balls we intentionally hit over the fence and we liked them because they reminded us of Satan.

They liked us because we didn't keep score and spent most the time chasing balls we intentionally hit over the fence and we liked them because they reminded us of Satan.
#95 | Posted by Sully

Goths I knew were usually smart enough to see through your disdain. I was confused for a jock by those who were not, and a wannabe by those who were. They were both wrong.

Goths? Hagbard, you are young enough to have been in school when the term was current? (That was poorly worded.) I think we just called them "freaks" when I was in school. : ) (I thought you were about my age, just barely over the hill.)

I was responding to the notion that putting them in school for more time is "getting them off their fat asses" as expressed earlier in the thread. In reality, kids spend less time on their asses when they aren't in school. So to the extent that kids are fat because they sit on their asses, putting them in school more would make them fatter. Can't get around that they spend most of the day at school on their butts.

#94 | Posted by Sully at 2009-09-28 03:37 PM

I think we just called them "freaks".

That's what everyone else called them. Goths was still used internally, within the group. Before it became a pejorative.

"Just saying that school does get a kid off their ass. Lots of walking between classes, extra curricular sports, PE, hell, even band was somewhat active."

Well for the lazy kids who never get off their asses unless forced, this is true. And since they are the most likely to be fat, I'll concede you're right. The kids I was talking about aren't going to have weight problems.

I still don't get the whole "goth" thing. They try to show everyone how different and expressive they are by dressing exactly like every other "goth" anyone has ever seen...

I treat them differently, though. I don't throw hot coffee on them when I drive past. I throw my Kodiak spitter at them instead.

"Goths I knew were usually smart enough to see through your disdain."

We had a few goths but not in my year. I'm talking more about kids who would wear black jeans or black shorts with a heavy metal T or a plain black shirt. They weren't 'burnouts' though. Smart kids who didn't try in regular classes, let alone PE. And we didn't disdain them. They were more "laughing with" kind of funny.

"I was confused for a jock by those who were not, and a wannabe by those who were. They were both wrong."

Sort of describes me except early on the wannabe part was probably true. But by the end of junior year my group of a dozen friends or so was more known for being the drunks/most likely to try drugs - which was actually not considered too cool by most of the kids in my year (until they came back from college acting like we did in high school). I was considered the nice one.

James Madison

"There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow clearly from the doctrine combated, must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up. If Congress can apply money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands;

they may establish teachers in every State, county, and parish, and pay them out of the public Treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;

they may undertake the regulation of all roads, other than post roads. In short, everything, from the highest object of State legislation, down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit the application of money, and might be called if Congress pleased provisions for the general welfare."

At least one founding father would have a problem with this.

"I still don't get the whole "goth" thing. They try to show everyone how different and expressive they are by dressing exactly like every other "goth" anyone has ever seen..."

Same thing with the punks... and the hippies... and any other group you can think of, be it social, racial, cultural or religious.

One of the sadder realizations of my life.

"We had a few goths but not in my year. I'm talking more about kids who would wear black jeans or black shorts with a heavy metal T or a plain black shirt."

Them ain't Goths; them is metalheads. I was one. Goths are into makeup and trenchcoats and wacky jewelry. : ) (We had two here in my school last year... Yep, two.)

"At least one founding father would have a problem with this."

Yes, with the entire department of ed, not specifically with this. : )

And people have seriously made the argument that there should be no federal DoE. I'm inclined to agree. Get your No Child Left Standing monkey off my fuckin' back. The state DoE is bad enough!

"One of the sadder realizations of my life."

Why? I used to tell the punk kids "You guys go to specialty shops and all dress alike. You pretend you don't give a shit but you obviously do.... Look what I'm wearing. Nobody considers this cool. If I cared about what people think about my clothes, would I ever leave the house in this? I'm the one who really doesn't give a shit...."

Some of my friends got really into the hippie/Grateful Dead scene and I would pull that out on them all the time too. "Oh, I look like a geek going to a Dead concert dressed like this? You motherfuckers mind as well be wearing a uniform...."

But the punks, goths, and the hippies were all trying to show how different they were. Nobody else was out trying to rebel against "norms", just those posers.

I liked CSN&Y, Floyd, Hendrix, Metallica, 60's, etc...A real hodge podge. I played sports, did lots of drugs, and hung out with a diverse group of friends. By diverse I mean there were a couple of wops, a lock, and a german amongst a core group of us Irish fellows.

Anyway. I partied equally as much with the fake hippies, fake freaks, jocks, smart kids, etc And never had a problem moving socially amongst the groups. I never understood the need to be put in the "freak, jock, preppie, etc" box. I was equal parts (although my parents would have never let me own freaker gear outside of the boots).

This much I'm sure of...If you ever had safety pins as an accessory, chances are you now own a cat.

"By diverse I mean there were a couple of wops, a lock, and a german amongst a core group of us Irish fellows."

We had more wops than micks. Plus a Swede and a Korean (his step parents were German and his Korean first name rhymed with his German last name, it was great). And our Polock was right off the boat so he talked funny, which was awesome too.

I'd never heard Polack shortened to 'lock. Intriguing.

Oddly enough, my social experience in high school sounds rather similar to 101's. Except I don't have his funny last line.

Oddly enough, my social experience in high school sounds rather similar to 101's.

#109 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-28 04:48 PM | Reply

Except your experience happened in a one room school-house like on Little House on the Prairie, you old bastard...

When's the last time a kid from the hood needed to know something he learned in trigonometry? -- #71 | Posted by JOE

It's not so much the subject matter that's important in trig, but the method -- learning how to use definitions and logic to make deductive arguments. Useful in many fields!

translation: we don't know what to do with the little fuckers while the parents have to work 2-3 jobs just to keep even.

back to the local goverment thing. All the city living libs think they are the only people in the country. there are still many areas where the kids are very involved in the harvest. Let the local schools decide, then there will be no problem. What one community does, will not effect another. Isn't the constitution a real problem solver? (to all the libs the answer is yes) Most libs will not like that, because you can't control the lives of others, so that must be a stupid idea.

"Except your experience happened in a one room school-house like on Little House on the Prairie, you old bastard..."

Nice try, but I'm willing to bet I"m younger than you are. Certainly younger than many of the posters here. Besides, ain't all liberals young? : )

"What one community does, will not effect another. "

I'm all for local control, but this is just incorrect. Just take sports as one example. In small states (and probably some large ones), sports teams often have to travel long distances to find someone in the same league. There are reasons to have schools on the same calendar.

And I am a hardly a city-living anything, and I know of some areas that used to be very connected with the harvest and aren't anymore. I think I posted about Maine's potato country earlier in this thread... But I agree that it's not so simple as Duncan makes out. It almost never is.

will they leave nothing to state and local control? OMG do we need different leadership...

And as expected, the right seems to be against education too.

What do you expect from the uneducated Rush and Beck crowd?

"Our school calendar is based upon the agrarian economy and not too many of our kids are working the fields today," Duncan said.

Seems the righties are against common sense too.

#116. Don't be a dumbshit. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the feds ought to have any role in education. It's left to the states. Most states leave these decisions, within parameters to school districts. School districts are represented by elected officials to represent what the public wants in that particular district. It's the most direct form or representation possible. They care more about education than some fucking wonk in washington, who wants kiddie day care.

Consitution? Who in the hell mentioned that.

I mentioned Common Sense. Something you are unable to grasp.

Ask yourself; DOES IT MAKE SENSE?

How could anyone be against more education?

"I was like, `Wow, are you serious?'" she said. "That's three more hours I won't be able to chill with my friends after school."

Ignorance and Republicans go hand in hand......

So, common sense (as relative as that may be from generation to generation) trumps the constitution? o.k., well, search and seizure may be sooo "obselete" next year that we can throw that out too.

I'm all for education. I'm all for local control as the best way to ensure geographically appropriate education. Fuck the wonks.

So, common sense (as relative as that may be from generation to generation) trumps the constitution?

Why do you think it has amendments?

Yes, Common Sense has in the past and will again in the future trump that document. They are called amendments.

See how more education could have helped you? I understand it's too late for you, but think of the children.

And where does it imply that this will be mandated by the Feds?

Oh, I forgot, you are a Chicken Shit as I mentioned on another thread who allows himself to be mislead to the point of blind fear by others.

It's why I laugh at you. You are a pathetic pussy.

Grow a fucking pair at quit being so fucking afraid.

"There will be no doctors left......."

"The Feds are going to control the minds of our children..........."

Really dude. Man the fuck up. You are pathetic.

"I'm all for local control as the best way to ensure geographically appropriate education."

You're hysterical. WTF does that even mean anymore? This country is a lot more contiguous than 233 years ago where a trip to the next town meant a three hour carriage ride...

3 posts in a row? wow, you really are worked up.

i'm not afraid, but i am concerned over massive governmental intervention in our lives. you, having likely never owed a business on which others rely on their livelihood, or been on a school board, or volunteered your time or money, or even paid your fair share of taxes, are the one that's pathetic.

I agree 100%. Require that students attend classes for the entire year. No more summers off. America is losing its high school credibility programs, instead of strengthening the program.

"will they leave nothing to state and local control? OMG do we need different leadership..."

I said this before: What the hell are you people talking about? The biggest impact on education in the last several years is No Child Left Behind, a Bush initiative (yes, approved or what have you by Dems). Education from a federal level is hardly new or unique to this administration. Fool.

#126 No Child Left Behind was a travesty, and doesn't work in practice. Robson, Asian countries, who stomp the shit out of us academically, spend less time in school. More time in school doesn't equate to a better education. Also, states are under huge financial pressure, and are authorizing fewer days per year now to relieve the financial burden. Who will pay the increase in salaries,etc? The feds? oh ya, I guess they can just print more money at will on full faith and credit.

I grew up in the former USSR where I just barely started 4th grade before fleeing as a refugee to the United States. Please keep in mind that my family came here to escape communism and that I am in no way commending that system of government. However, I do think their primary school systems were excellent in teaching language and mathematics.

We went to school 6 days a week, with Saturday being a half day. You graduate after 10 years, with the option to graduate from 8th grade. We had summers off, starting at the end of May. School recommenced on September 1st. In the USSR, it was typical for people to have 2 months long vacations from work, so having the summer off for kids actually did impact family vacation/tourism in a big way.

By 4th grade, I was learning Algebra and had no trouble with it whatsoever. I think people underestimate how well kids can handle complex topics. I only attended the first few months of 4th grade before being whisked away to the US.

When I got to the States, not knowing a word of English, I aced the math test for 6th grade. Due to my young age, I was put in 5th grade (instead of 7th), where I was bored out of my mind in Math class. The kids in my class were amazingly smart, but were used to a crawling pace for the information presented to them. It was frustrating to me that they all thought I was so smart, when really I was maybe just a slightly above average student in the USSR system.

In short, I think the problem in the primary schools here is not the length of year, but the expectations people have of students. Kids are very capable of absorbing "difficult" subjects, as long as they are made to feel that they are more than capable of handling the information.

American kids definitely need to catch up on math. Our lowest common denominator approach to education is clearly failing. Parents should definitely step up more when it comes to education their children. My friends 4 year old kid can add, subtract, and he's even starting to grasp the concept of multiplication.

Fuck that.

Our kids don't need more time in school. We need fewer thugs disrupting classes -- hence fewer dirt bag parents having kids -- hence birth licensing.

There is no freedom to arbitrarily spawn defined in the bill of rights.

You have to demonstrate competence to drive a vehicle... should we not also require the same before one claims responsibility over another human being?

should we not also require the same before one claims responsibility over another human being?
#132 | Posted by apparatchik at 2009-09-28 09:51 PM | Reply | Flag: Thomas Malthus, is that you?

No, Hagbard, but close enough I suppose. Ever since reading a bunch of Daniel Quinn, I've been quite the Malthusian.

My question with birth licensing is always, Who decides? Does anyone here want the gov't (state or fed) deciding if he or she gets a birth license or parenting license?

Somoco, what's Robson? In a quick Google search, I saw a claim that Korea and Japan go more days, and then I saw a counterclaim that that's made up for in number of instruction hours. But that's confusing because in the same search I saw that they go from 8:30 to 3:50, which is longer than any school day I've experienced as student or teacher... So do they have more study halls? Hm. Just ain't got time for serious research. Somoco, if you do, would you share some links?

It seems to me that more hours of education time would be a good thing--the question is, What defines education time? (Ah, a whole new thread.)

G'night.

"Obama wants longer school year: ALL YEAR"

He wants those kids singing about him even in the summer.

#35 | Posted by goatman at 2009-09-28 01:11 AM

I don't know why, but that just stuck me as so damn funny.

But then I do love dry humor.

are you sure it is the humor?

Yes, I'm sure. You've made me laugh before too.

If something hits me funny, it just does. Usually the dryer the humor the better.

I'm not one who finds actual joke telling all that humorous as I am for wisecracks making me laugh the most.

You should give me some credit, $$$War.

I was the ONLY person on here who knew immediately what you were trying to say and what you meant when you wrote --

Only people speaking the language of known conflict have now become the entire housing military.

Cali,

I do give you credit, I have ALWAYS liked you.

I do laugh at those who try to ridicule individuals using out of context quotes from other threads. It shows their limited intellect.

Most of the time at hurl my little scuds at you it is in gest, just funnin.

Cali,

If you like dry sense of humor I am sure I have made you laugh.

My family always gets mad at me because my humor is so dry.

Cali,

I do have to laugh though, word for word.....means you had to copy and save it too!

Didn't know I would be so important as to warrant such.

Cali,

I do have to laugh though, word for word.....means you had to copy and save it too!

Didn't know I would be so important as to warrant such.

Actually I only had to go to Jak's userpage as he has it quoted there under his username. lol

But still, just because a person may sometimes jumble words doesn't mean anything. A lot of times people are thinking fast and their mind tends to run ahead of their speech. It doesn't meant they don't know what they're saying. I knew what you meant to say that day. And, sometimes here on DR when a thread is moving fast and you're trying to concentrate on your answer and another post, your mind is racing quicker than you type (or vice versa) so it's not hard for one to get tripped up.

But like BuffaloBob's car antennas, you will always be famous in DR history for "housing the military."

Actually, I thought it was kinda cute so I wouldn't let it bother me if I were you.

Cali,

actually I don't let it bother me. When they bring it up it tells me they are unable to defend their position.

I teach in a poor high school in a mostly poor town (vastly working class, little wealth). I'm talking about regular kids who have lives beyond television. Lots of them.

#55 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-28 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

Of course you do. You are a teacher and so you see the kids who ARE NOT watching TV (or playing video games). Having some logic problems there?

This reminds me of the nitwit who could not understand how Ronald Reagan won, because "nobody I know voted for him."

Otherwise, we agree that year-round school is a good thing.

"Of course you do. You are a teacher and so you see the kids who ARE NOT watching TV (or playing video games). Having some logic problems there?"

That was a bizarre comment. Vernon, I know my kids. I talk with them outside the classroom. I work with them in other contexts. We were talking about how kids behave in summer time. No logic problem at all. I know what I know. If you choose not to believe it, that's up to you. I am clearly expressing anecdotal evidence.

"Otherwise, we agree that year-round school is a good thing."

Yes, we do. And I maintain that you were and are painting with a very broad brush when you talk about how teenagers are and what they do with their time.

But oh well. If you missed my point or choose to dismiss it, well, it's your issue, not mine.

Ignorance and Republicans go hand in hand......

#118 | Posted by Manypaths
Libs just don't get it. Goberment edumacations is a product of the democrat party, and it sucks. Do something right just once, and then ask for more. Repubs are all for better education, we just don't think the feds are capable of providing it. That notion comes from fact, unless you want to say they are doing a great job now??? Local govt is the best place to provide quality education, not the feds. Libs are all for failed federal policies. Bad schools and Dems go hand in hand...

"Repubs are all for better education, we just don't think the feds are capable of providing it. That notion comes from fact, unless you want to say they are doing a great job now??? Local govt is the best place to provide quality education, not the feds."

Jeezus, you are on ignurnt sumbitch, aintcha?

Ever heard of local school boards? State departments of education? The biggest cockup in recent years with respect to federal involvement is "No Child Left Behind," the product of a Republican president and Republican congress.

Get yersef eddikated.

#148 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis
And Dead Ted. But it shows once again that the feds suck at what they do. Doc, I am not sure how you get your talking points, only way I could see that you could read them is if O pirnted them across his ass. Common sense is the closer to the people a program is run the better it is for the people. AKA the constitution.

And Dead Ted.
#149 | Posted by freechoice

Typically classless observation from another boob who reflects the GOP culture of a complete lack of personal responsiblity.

My statement remains unchallenged (certainly not challenged by you): "No Child Left Behind" passed a GOP-controlled Congress, was signed into law by a GOP president, and implement by a GOP-controlled Department of Education.

Do you question that?

"My statement remains unchallenged (certainly not challenged by you): "No Child Left Behind" passed a GOP-controlled Congress, was signed into law by a GOP president, and implement by a GOP-controlled Department of Education."

Although, as someone (Goat?) pointed out the other day, more Dems than Repubs voted for it. Otherwise, I completely agree with you. I would like the feds to get the fuck outta my school. Or if they're gonna stick their noses in, to pony up the bucks.

That said, I still agree with a longer school year. (With commensurate increase in pay.)

#150 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis
Not at all numbnuts, GOP sucks, Dems suck, but more importantly the Feds have no ability to run the Education systems. Proven by the results. Do you question that? The best place for any goverment policy is at the lowest possible level. It is best for the people and the results of the policy.

"The best place for any goverment policy is at the lowest possible level."

At the local school board?
You have a lot to learn about education.
I have no problem with sensible federal regulations that accompany money doled out from the federal level.
There are plenty of problems with education in this country.
And many have to do with moronic state/local entities.

That said, I still agree with a longer school year. (With commensurate increase in pay.)

#151 | Posted by pragmatist
I am for better education. The more gubberment edumacations that people are forced to endure, the more dependant dems we have voting themselves all kinds of goodies from the govt coffers. If a community feels longer is better, more power to them (and less to the feds) if they feel more semesters with shorter breaks in between is better then great. All year school, wonderful. Let the local people decide, not the feds.

And many have to do with moronic state/local entities.

#153 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis
And those are much easier fixed then screw up at the federal level, ie your complaint about no child left behind. If it was easy to fix, and the dems are so wonderful, they would have done it already. Just one more example of how the feds suck. Get some honesty, the lower the ploicy the easier it is to fix, also lets compitition come into play. Better School Boards and communities will attract more people. People will have the choice between areas to live, instead of the feds bringing all schools down to the same shitty level. I know you are all about compition, especially when the govt provides it.

Read some of Jonathan Kozol's books and you'll learn something about localization of education.

What, for example, do you suggest for school districts with a woeful tax base? Less money for education? No? Then where's that money going to come from? From what source are the laws that move that money going to emanate?

"No Child Left Behind" passed a GOP-controlled Congress, was signed into law by a GOP president, and implement by a GOP-controlled Department of Education.

Do you question that?

#156

While many states do primarily use local tax revenue, with rates set by local school boards, to fund local schools, I was under the impression that many states, in order to alleviate the disparity had established state wide funding pools which awarded funds to districts/counties based on the number of students. I've also read that some states use supplimental funding for low income schools (Title I) in order to level the field so to speak. I know that the state I live in also awards money to schools based on the number of special education students, as well as the number of gifted students.

I think your adult population should be forced out of their fucking ignorance and placed back in school. It's not that the average american is dumb, they just don't know much about anything.

Obama Supports Longer School Year

Not a bad idea considering how horribly our public schools have been in terms of generating results.

"While many states do primarily use local tax revenue, with rates set by local school boards, to fund local schools, I was under the impression that many states, in order to alleviate the disparity had established state wide funding pools which awarded funds to districts/counties based on the number of students. I've also read that some states use supplimental funding for low income schools (Title I) in order to level the field so to speak. I know that the state I live in also awards money to schools based on the number of special education students, as well as the number of gifted students."

Absolutely correct. There are state models whereby towns/cities send revenues to the state and said revenues are redistributed. (Oh, no, socialism!) It doesn't really level the playing field, but that is indeed the intent. Ditto Title I. Both of these are imperfect models/sources, and there are insane politics in play (starting with proprietary feelings/senses of entitlement based on where you live... or ideas of unfairness--"Why should my tax money go to help some poor town?"). In reality, what we have is wildly disparate average monies spent per student and wildly disparate pay scales for teachers. Twenty miles up the river, I can make 150% or more of my current salary (assuming I can get a job there or want to).

One of the biggest problems in education is funding. That's true locally and on a national level. IDEA, for instance, the special ed law (or rather the law that covers special ed) has never funded anywhere near its mandated/state level; I won't cite numbers, but what they do (they being our tax dollars) is only a fraction of what they promised to do. And ESEA (commonly called No Child Left Behind these days) is one of the great governmental "unfunded mandates": DO THIS OR FAIL! And there's been little influx of cash to support the cost of test creation, test administering, and test assessment/analysis. (Never mind all the instructional issues, but we're just talking money right now.)

I'm not trying to cite figures; this stuff can be looked up fairly easily. It's also said so often that it's just common awareness at this point (of those who are engaged in the conversation). So yeah, I"m being a little lazily. But Google "unfunded mandate" or "NCLB funding" or "IDEA funding gap" if you want hard numbers.

I think your adult population should be forced out of their fucking ignorance and placed back in school. It's not that the average american is dumb, they just don't know much about anything.

#159 | Posted by panchovilla
Thanks to Doc's wonderfull all encompassing goberment edumacations. Those Feds do a wonderful job!

Utastaff, you are very confused about education (though you make a good point about added costs). And about Obama's desires. Never mind the reality that the DoE can't successfully force this. It's all smoke, really, and nothing new.

And btw, hold teachers and administrators accountable? Sure, that's fine (though explain to me how teachers are not accountable and what exactly you'd like to see change), how about holding _students and parents_ accountable? The best lesson in the world does no good if a kid isn't present, doesn't give a shit, or doesn't do the follow-up work.

In AZ the Fed provides over 10% of the States educational budget, so this may not be exclusively a state issue.

Does anyone know the affect on GDP in having an educated work force?

I recall Fed & state funded education programs as having achieved some incredible U.S. goals and presumably helped with U.S. economic expansion and dominance since the 1950's.

Why would anyone protest our having smarter more capable kids? Oh, that is right, it is the messenger that you hate and our kids and future, unfortunately, must suffer while you once again put yourself and not your country first.

And btw, hold teachers and administrators accountable? Sure, that's fine (though explain to me how teachers are not accountable and what exactly you'd like to see change), how about holding _students and parents_ accountable? The best lesson in the world does no good if a kid isn't present, doesn't give a shit, or doesn't do the follow-up work.

#164 | Posted by pragmatist

Obviously, you are making good points. I think school districts need to have greater control over firing teachers who "phone it in." Teachers get tenured and it is near impossible to fire them when they underperform. Some have absolutely no passion or creativity in their teaching. The students pick up on it and don't care either. Look what Jaime Escalante did for poor inner city L.A. kids. He got gangbangers to score 4's and 5's on their AP Calculus tests. He had passion. I also believe that teachers should be financially rewarded with bonuses for raising test scores past certain benchmarks which teachers' unions oppose.

Parents should be required to sign off on documents attesting that their kids have done X hours of homework per week and be required under penalty of fines (small like $50 or so) for not at least conducting periodic phone interviews (although preferably in person) with teachers regarding their kids' performance. You can even get creative and give tax credits if your child performs at a certain level on standardized tests or shows a certain level of improvement even if they don't reach a set benchmark. Some parents just care but if they can save money (tax credit) they might get more involved. Some parents just won't give a rats ass but I believe you can help the vast majority of kids being creative and really caring.

Uta, thanks for not taking the bait I offered--classy move. I often think you're nuts, but you are approaching this topic rationally. I don't know if I can agree that your ideas would work, but you're trying beyond blaming teachers en masse.

I absolutely agree that some teachers (like some members of probably every profession) are phoning it in. This is, I think, most often the result of burnout. I have suggested to union people I know that we need a way to counsel teachers out of the profession once they've reached that point, that if they've paid into the retirement system they shouldn't be screwed out of their retirement because they got burned out. (Obviously--or I hope obviously--I'm talking about teachers who once had "it"...)

"Teachers get tenured and it is near impossible to fire them when they underperform."

In some cases it is. But in many states, it's just a matter of what's called just cause. That is, if administrators do their jobs (not easy given admin workloads in some cases) and make a case, a teacher can be fired. It's a canard that teachers can't be fired. Most union leaders I've known would hold the door open if it can be proven that a teacher is doing a poor job. It doesn't do any of us any good to have bad teachers in the system.

"Some have absolutely no passion or creativity in their teaching. The students pick up on it and don't care either."

True, but also true that some kids just don't care, for whatever reason. I have an almost disturbing level of passion : ), and while that lights some kids up, it doesn't work for everyone. There's no panacea. But you're right, at base--kids pick up on teacher attitudes.

"Look what Jaime Escalante did for poor inner city L.A. kids. He got gangbangers to score 4's and 5's on their AP Calculus tests. He had passion."

He also had art and technique. He was clever--and he spoke their language (literally and figuratively), and he knew how to hook 'em. He also _cared_. In deep and sometimes painful ways that I don't think you can expect every teacher to care. There aren't enough people like that in the world. We can't all be Mr. Escalante. But again, I get your point.

To be continued...

Continued...

"I also believe that teachers should be financially rewarded with bonuses for raising test scores past certain benchmarks which teachers' unions oppose."

Now this I can't get my head around. Test scores are not the only or the best indicator of achievement. Don't just take my word for it--I believe it, but kids believe it, too. Some do. And some 'cause they hate the tests, but I had a conversation two weeks ago with a senior lad who does well on these tests but suggested that they were basically BS. Another concern is that if you start tying pay to test scores, teaching becomes about the test, not the passion or creativity, and the push in the school becomes competitive. Finally, what do you do about disciplines for which there aren't tests? Band, theater, and PE come to mind. If you tie pay to test scores, you're devaluing these fields--and I firmly believe that they are important with a capital I. And not just 'cause I'm interested in "culture."

"Parents should be required to sign off on documents attesting that their kids have done X hours of homework per week and be required under penalty of fines (small like $50 or so) for not at least conducting periodic phone interviews (although preferably in person) with teachers regarding their kids' performance."

I like it, in a way, but how do you legislate that? Can you imagine? "These liberals think they can control our kids and tell us how to raise them! Damn that Obama! Screw those teachers!"

".... Some parents just won't give a rats ass but I believe you can help the vast majority of kids being creative and really caring."

I do think I've seen that some teachers are dead-set in their ways and not open to change. I've seen that some kids just don't seem to care about school in the traditional sense. I've seen that some kids will rise to the occasion if given the chance and the right hook. And I think your heart is in the right place on this one.

I also think we need to reinvent school--the system as a whole. We need new paradigms, alternate settings and methodologies.... I envision smaller schools, with different focuses, but you know, a sea change is a bitch to pull off. The history of school reform is filled with creative ideas--and huge obstacles thrown up, often by the very people whose children the reformers want to help or whose agendas the reformers are actually trying to address.

Pragmatist,

All these ideas sounds like a whole lot of change to me. I believe that change evokes fear and that, unfortunately, is the problem. People just don't like it. They don't like it whether you are building a Circle K or a "better" school system. People deal best with less stressful modest changes over time and that is not what we are getting. Shoot, we all want better schools and we all want our children to be educated with every chance at success in a global economy, right? As do you, I consider the debate about what those improvements are and how they would be financed and managed a good and important process. I don't agree with all your points, but I appreciate that you "envision" something. After all, change is inevitable.

Unfortunately he forgot, he would have to pay for it

"All these ideas sounds like a whole lot of change to me. I believe that change evokes fear and that, unfortunately, is the problem. People just don't like it. They don't like it whether you are building a Circle K or a "better" school system. People deal best with less stressful modest changes over time and that is not what we are getting. Shoot, we all want better schools and we all want our children to be educated with every chance at success in a global economy, right? As do you, I consider the debate about what those improvements are and how they would be financed and managed a good and important process. I don't agree with all your points, but I appreciate that you "envision" something. After all, change is inevitable. "

Thanks, Shawn. We don't have to agree--hell, I think the best changes come about in discussions where the participants _don't_ agree; that's where real change and widespread satisfaction arises--as long as we can have open, civil conversation. Education needs work in this country. And I think we're smart enough to use multiple models and to find solutions to the funding issue. There is no one simple, easy answer; that's the first thing any participants have to agree on, else we get nowhere. Fast.

for once I agree with Obama. It would be nice to see the private schools take the lead on this

"The better to indoctrinate our children, my dear", said the liberal wolves in sheeps clothing.

Really, why do so many people lead to the indoctrination issue? Seriously. Are you people just trolling? A single video incident, no matter how often it's viewed, is hardly an indication that schools are creating programs of praise for this president. If President Bush's secretary (well, which one?) had made this suggestion, would you make the same accusation?

And why would private schools take the lead, or why would anyone hope for them to take the lead? Just curious on that one.

More time with the same leeches is just going to cost more, its not going to make the kids better educated....

Says a teacher (#175) or someone who claims to be a teacher. Why do I think you're a private school teacher, or not a teacher at all? If you really are a teacher, you're woefully underinformed about educational theory and perhaps practice.

someone please tell this fuckin liar that according to the 10th amendment to the constitution...he has no right or ability to bring anything about education like this........

and this education secretary is a holder of an anti constitutional department to begin with

Afk, buddy, chill. Actually, the 10th amendment doesn't specify education, but I know what you meant.

So what about your presidential idol? His legacy--or part of it--is No Child Left Behind, a mandate of ... wait for it... the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. So... Um... Think before you speak, man. Don't let your hatred blind you...

That said, there are tons of educators who would love to see the federal DoE disbanded. I'm mixed. IDEA (the law that led to special ed) is, I think, a good thing. But they could do that under the aegis of some other department or find their way to it in some less constitutionally problematic way.

I also think that (some of) the founding fathers didn't want Congress to have anything to do with education not just because of states' rights but because the needs of education were more localized then. We are all more connected now, and I would think we might _want_ standards on a more national level. We don't talk about Maine competing with California; we talk about the US competing with other countries.

You're right about education and the 10th amendment, or being subject/delimited by the 10th amendment, but aiming your gun (figuratively!) solely at Obama is ... silly. Look at the _idea_, Afk. You're smarter than that. Look at the _idea_. Should kids have more days of school per year? (I think they should.)

Pragmatist,

I am, in fact, a public school teacher, and a good one. However, there are too few of me, and even fewer good administrators. Giving those theives monopoly control has been a debacle. Market competition would help a lot, although its not the whole solution...

So why are you so down on your colleagues? You're the only good one you know. Wow, man, sad world you live in. Once, we had a fairly interesting conversation, then I see comments like 175 that lead me to believe... I don't know what. If you're so down on public schools, why do you keep going?

I agree with you on too few good teachers, but not to the degree you apparently conceive or perceive.

I agree with you on too few good administrators--ye gods, do I agree. Successful elimination of bad teachers (or improvement of mediocre) rests mostly with good administrators.

What thieves? What monopoly control? What leeches? Market competition is a myth. Schools are not businesses--at base, not businesses. There's no profit built in (not K-12, not public), nor should there be. How would that work? Oh, never mind, we had this argument--or parts of it--at length a month or so ago.

I agree, though, that longer time is not the whole solution. See my various posts on the matter. And if you want, we can talk again. But it is interesting--after our last talk, I concluded that you had to be a private school teacher who became a teacher through alternate certification of some kind (or no certification at all), based on your opinions on certification and the idea that "any smart person can teach high school" (or something like that). Now you tell me that's not true. If I take you at face value (believe you), I am forced to scratch my head in wonder and consternation. If I take you as a troll or pretender, it all makes sense. What's a fella ta do?!?!?!

(Yes, I really do have better things to do with my time. : ) Like go to bed, having just worked out some plans for working on Hamlet tomorrow...)