Why do we want the best test scores?

[Bilberry]

When it comes to schools, and other areas, individualization is one item that we seem to be moving toward in our society. Pretty much ever since around the 1930s western countries set up big box schools where teaching everyone about the same became common.

Now in the internet/ information age some are looking to reform away from how we set up our teaching system in the 20th Century. We're in the early stages of school reform, experimentation is occurring, but change is coming. For example recall this about reforms in teaching ideas ~

"Does School Stunt The Teenage Brain?"

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/01/28/does-school-stunt-the-teenage-brain/

snippet:

...Apprenticeships and other forms of education could well be healthier and more effective than our present over-emphasis on the classroom.
School reform in America needs to involve much more than objective test scores. The 20th century universal school system of rigid grades and the growing separation of learning and work may have made sense 100 years ago. To sit still, follow directions, move with the herd and live by the clock were important skills in the days when repetitive jobs in factories and offices were how most adults lived. But civilization is at a higher level now, and we need to prepare kids for more fluid and dynamic lives.
You don’t need to be a neurologist to see that modern schools stunt brains.

&

"Power to Lead, Power to Teach"

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/05/02/power-to-lead-power-to-teach/

snippet:

The big domestic story that we try to cover here at Via Meadia has two dimensions: the breakdown of our old social model, and the construction of something that can one day replace it. We track that story in many fields: education is one of the most important. From K to PhD the old system is expensive, cumbersome and, too often, produces mediocrity or worse.
Yet we don’t need less education in this country. Americans need to learn more, and learn it faster, and learn it in schools that don’t cost more than they can reasonably afford to pay.
A lot of our coverage is necessarily downbeat, as we chronicle the woes of an increasingly dysfunctional system—but we believe that the American story is ultimately one of renewal and innovation rather than of stagnation and decline. All over the country, institutions and organizations are trying new ideas, changing the way they work, cutting unnecessary costs and red tape, and inventing the future on the wreckage of the past.
Charter schools are one example. They are not a panacea, and some work better than others, but they have accomplished some great things, and they are an excellent example of the reconstruction process at work.
Mike Feinberg, the co-founder of the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP), the country’s largest public charter school network, shares some ideas for American education over at the Atlantic:...

 

[Coconut36]

While I agree with you that a parent should be actively involved in their child's education, finding someone or somewhere to supplement what the public school's provide, going to a private or charter school is just not a possibility to many. And every child, regardless of their parent's finances, deserve the same education.

That means the parents need to find the means to pay for it. Sorry but that is the reality of being a parent. If you don't have the resources to hire a tutor or bring in help then figure out how to do it yourself. The only way I would be OK with the Govt footing the bill for private or other means of education is if those institutions had to follow the exact same acceptance guidelines as a public school..meaning they take everyone and they have the same restrictions/regulations public school does. If one wants a specialized or exclusive education for their child it is up to them to pay for it. Nothing will convince me otherwise. There is a lot in life I might want or want for my child and it's up to me to pay for it...private or specialized education is the same. There is an option for those without means for private ed and if they deem it not for them then they need to find a way to pay for what they want.

 

[Coconut36]

Another thing that should be mentioned is that teachers are very highly valued in Finland, and the process is VERY selective:

http://www.helsinki.fi/news/archive/1-2012/25-16-58-02.html


Most teachers are required to spend more time in school as well. Most teachers hold a master's degree. Compare that to the US, where all you need is a Bachelor's (in pretty much anything) and a teaching certificate. In fact, I could go get a temporary certificate today and be allowed to teach by submitting my college transcripts and taking an exam that basically proves I am fluent in basic maths, English and history. After two years teaching in a public school -- as a regular teacher! -- I can apply for and get a permanent teaching certificate.

We don't value our teachers here in the US. We put too many regulations on them and don't require enough education for them. We allow pretty much anyone who can get a BA/BS to become a teacher whether or not they have an aptitude for teaching (And I do believe teaching is a talent, not a learned skill.) At my daughter's (private) school, they get paid less to start, but just about every teacher has an advanced degree in some sort of educational field. My daughter's first grade teacher holds a masters in childhood literacy. Many of the teachers are working toward their doctorates. Even though they're paid less, they seem happier because there aren't a bunch of god awful restrictions on how they teach.

I firmly agree with the bold..it's a huge issue here in the US.

I don't however agree that anyone can teach long term with any old BA. There are highly qualified requirements that must be met for a teacher to continue to teach a given subject. I know that people can be hired on in emergency situations with any BA but at least in my state they can not hold a position long term (basically they are subbing without a BA in Ed and can't maintain those positions long term without taking the test to get their certificate and then a test for highly qualified on their given subject area..even general ed teachers in K-6th grade have to have 1 area they are highly qualified for). Teachers have to have a certain amount of education/focus in a given subject to teach that subject or have to take a test that demonstrates their proficiency in that subject. My DH started teaching before "highly qualified" went into place and after over 5 years of teaching Math had to take a test to be qualified to continue to teach that subject. Also the majority of teachers I know here all have MA in Ed because you need it. If a teacher doesn't have it odds are high they are in the process of completing it while continuing to teach. I would say in my experience those without plans to pursue one are the minority not the majority.

 

[luvsJack]

That means the parents need to find the means to pay for it. Sorry but that is the reality of being a parent. If you don't have the resources to hire a tutor or bring in help then figure out how to do it yourself. The only way I would be OK with the Govt footing the bill for private or other means of education is if those institutions had to follow the exact same acceptance guidelines as a public school..meaning they take everyone and they have the same restrictions/regulations public school does. If one wants a specialized or exclusive education for their child it is up to them to pay for it. Nothing will convince me otherwise. There is a lot in life I might want or want for my child and it's up to me to pay for it...private or specialized education is the same. There is an option for those without means for private ed and if they deem it not for them then they need to find a way to pay for what they want.

Sorry, but your first statement is just not realistic.

The issues in education should not be the "haves' vs "the have nots". Education is something every child deserves and something that should be given to the best of our country's ability. Are we doing that? If we are, why is there a need for private education or tutors?

 

[Coconut36]

Sorry, but your first statement is just not realistic.

The issues in education should not be the "haves' vs "the have nots". Education is something every child deserves and something that should be given to the best of our country's ability. Are we doing that? If we are, why is there a need for private education or tutors?

It needs to be realistic and that is part of the trouble with education. Too many times parents feel they are "done" and can't be bothered to do what is needed for their child. I was their first teacher and I will remain their teacher even if they are in school. That's part of my role as a parent.

As for why a need for tutors? Because education is not a one size fits all thing. Some kids need tutors to help them..no matter how spectacular the school a kid can still fall behind and need help, a kid can still have a subject area they just can not "get" and need help with. A for a "need" for private education..there isn't. It's a preference in regards to what a school may offer that another school doesn't..that doesn't make it a "need"..for example many people choose private schools for the religious aspect of it..that doesn't mean that needs to be included in public school..simply that those parents feel that is important..and if they feel that they need to pay for it (or obtain scholarships/grants for it). The Gov't should not have to foot the bill because they want religion as part of their kids education (just one example).

A parent would be very misguided if they think that just because their kid is in the "best" school they would never need tutoring or assistance in learning or never need additional challenges.

 

[luvsJack]

It needs to be realistic and that is part of the trouble with education. Too many times parents feel they are "done" and can't be bothered to do what is needed for their child. I was their first teacher and I will remain their teacher even if they are in school. That's part of my role as a parent.

As for why a need for tutors? Because education is not a one size fits all thing. Some kids need tutors to help them..no matter how spectacular the school a kid can still fall behind and need help, a kid can still have a subject area they just can not "get" and need help with. A for a "need" for private education..there isn't. It's a preference in regards to what a school may offer that another school doesn't..that doesn't make it a "need"..for example many people choose private schools for the religious aspect of it..that doesn't mean that needs to be included in public school..simply that those parents feel that is important..and if they feel that they need to pay for it (or obtain scholarships/grants for it). The Gov't should not have to foot the bill because they want religion as part of their kids education (just one example).

A parent would be very misguided if they think that just because their kid is in the "best" school they would never need tutoring or assistance in learning or never need additional challenges.

Religion isn't the only thing that sends people to private schools. In fact, of the two major private schools here, religion is a small factor for most parents.

As for it "should be realistic", so in your opinion, a parent should choose to not put food on the table to pay for a tutor? Or maybe they should have their lights turned off this month so their child can get additional challenges in math? Finding a way to pay for it isn't the simple solution you are making it.

Many, many public schools do offer tutoring at no cost. In fact, I think all of them around here do so I don't see that as an issue, at least here.

It would be the additional challenges that should be a part of the public school system. If the public school is not giving the students what they need for a successful education, then there should be more provided.

 

[LisaR]

I don't think we can make a blanket statement about education in the US.

We certainly have some areas where parents aren't involved and outside influences such as poverty, drugs, and crime interfere with children receiving a proper educations. And we certainly have our fair share of people who simply don't give a damn.

We have some districts that aren't receiving much funding per student and we have some awful teachers that are in the system.

However, we have plenty of other districts that are receiving proper funding. There are strong communities with involved parents. We have plenty of absolutely wonderful teachers working their butts off to educate our children. Yet somehow, some of those schools still manage to fail.

I'm assuming that other countries have some of the same problems we have, and they are still able to overcome these obstacles and educate children properly.

You can't tell me that every parent in Finland has the exact right amount of involvement and never over or under steps their bounds?

I can't believe we are the only country in the world that has kids with learning disabilities, a father in prison, a family busting their butt to make ends meet, or medical problems that require long hospital stays, surgeries, or other problems that make learning difficult.

It isn't one thing. It is like we have all of the pieces of the puzzle scattered out in front of us and we are only able to complete a portion of the puzzle. We can't figure out a way to make the pieces fit together working with what we have. We always want something more or different. It seems to me we have tried more things and different things and we haven't gotten any further.

 

[Coconut36]

Religion isn't the only thing that sends people to private schools. In fact, of the two major private schools here, religion is a small factor for most parents.

As for it "should be realistic", so in your opinion, a parent should choose to not put food on the table to pay for a tutor? Or maybe they should have their lights turned off this month so their child can get additional challenges in math? Finding a way to pay for it isn't the simple solution you are making it.

Many, many public schools do offer tutoring at no cost. In fact, I think all of them around here do so I don't see that as an issue, at least here.

It would be the additional challenges that should be a part of the public school system. If the public school is not giving the students what they need for a successful education, then there should be more provided.

Oh you are being over the top here..no parent with any sense would forgo the basics for a tutor and most schools (public) offer FREE tutoring assistance if a parent is strapped financially and I never once indicated they should do such a thing or that it was necessary. What I am trying to say is that it is a parents job to obtain help if it is needed..that does NOT mean they have to pay out money get them help either.

They can also step up to the plate themselves or find a family member or friend to help..it's not impossible to get your child assistance with no financial burden and as a parent that is your job.

I also used religion as ONE example of why people choose private schools..there are others but again it is THEIR choice to seek private education for whatever the reason and because it is their choice it is their responsibility to pay for that education. If they can not do so then they can send their child to a school for free (public/charter) and supplement/assist as needed. I stand firm that if a parent feels that private education is the best thing for their child that is absolutely their choice and right to do so..but it is also their responsibility to pay for it. If they can't do it (and can't get a grant/scholarship) their child can still receive and education for free so it's not like it is private school or nothing.

 

[goofy4tink]

I confess to not having read all the posts here. But, in all reality??? Our teachers are still 'teaching to the test'..sad to say. Three years ago, when my dd was a
sophomore in high school, she came home from a science class and told me...'One of the kids asked a really interesting question in class today..and you know what the teacher's response was??? 'I wish we had time to go into that, but we have stuff we have to cover before testing begins.'' Now, that's sad...a lot could have been learned by further investigation into that question. But no....the teacher had to 'stick to the script' so to speak!!!
Our schools are hindered by having to squeeze in too much in the few hours they are allowed to be open. Heaven forbid a town/city think about keeping schools open a bit longer...oh no, poor skippy won't be able to fit in basketball practice!!! Then the parents say that their kids need time for their part time jobs, but you know what??? Middle class kids in our town really aren't working..their parents just use that as an excuse!!!

Education isn't really valued here..other than as a way for parents to feel better about themselves by being able to say which upper tiered college their child is going to. In my town it is so bad that there are kids who are bypassing perfectly good state schools, or taking a year off (when they really should) and are heading to pricey private colleges because they are embarrassed to say what they really want!!! I know that my dd was ashamed to think about what would be said to her if she had gone to one of the several state colleges that accepted her. She chose a private college....a good fit for her in the end. But still....to have that way of thinking is wrong.

We need to value our kids enough to demand a well rounded education, in all public schools. If the more well off towns can afford to offer more, then fine, so be it. But every single child should have the basics. And we need to stop saying that every child should go to college...that's really wrong.

 

[pumpkinmomma]

I'm one that feels we need to do better in math and science and English, as well.

What are the alternatives? Settle or 14th place? Strive to do worse? Shouldn't one always strive to be better? Maybe we won't ever end up at the top but I would certainly hope we never give up trying to improve.

Having said that, I do not think teaching to the test is the way to go about it, and that obviously isn't working anyway.

The 13 countries above us aren't teaching to the test. I am always perplexed as to why this is the method we have adopted when it doesn't work.

I don't think everyone is meant to get a higher education, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't learn the core subjects to the best of their given ability. The fact that so many are entering college and still require remedial math and English courses says so much about our current system.

I agree.

I teach remedial math at community college. 40% of the students at my school need remedial math. That means 40% of the students are not up to Algebra II. That is abysmal.

It's not just that we aren't graduating enough students with higher math skills like trig or calc, but we are graduating people that barely have basic math skills. I have students who cannot do fractions, don't know their multiplication tables, have no understanding of basic scientific or math principles, and who are generally lacking the ability to think critically about math or science.

These are average students. They should be able to do better and we as a country should demand better. They are capable of learning the material, but we need to do a better job of teaching math and science.

 

[luvsJack]

Oh you are being over the top here..no parent with any sense would forgo the basics for a tutor and most schools (public) offer FREE tutoring assistance if a parent is strapped financially and I never once indicated they should do such a thing or that it was necessary. What I am trying to say is that it is a parents job to obtain help if it is needed..that does NOT mean they have to pay out money get them help either.

They can also step up to the plate themselves or find a family member or friend to help..it's not impossible to get your child assistance with no financial burden and as a parent that is your job.

I also used religion as ONE example of why people choose private schools..there are others but again it is THEIR choice to seek private education for whatever the reason and because it is their choice it is their responsibility to pay for that education. If they can not do so then they can send their child to a school for free (public/charter) and supplement/assist as needed. I stand firm that if a parent feels that private education is the best thing for their child that is absolutely their choice and right to do so..but it is also their responsibility to pay for it. If they can't do it (and can't get a grant/scholarship) their child can still receive and education for free so it's not like it is private school or nothing.

I didn't say that any parent WOULD do those things. I asked if you were suggesting that. You said that is should be realistic that a parent should find a way to pay for it. I was simply pointing out that it isn't always realistic.

Tutoring is always free in our schools for any child that needs it. Like I said, its the challenging material, teaching them to their full potential that is something parents look for much more than tutoring.

As for private schools, here's the thing. Many of the parents here send their kids to one of the two major private schools in our area because of the educational opportunities they have. Its not small class size because truthfully, many of the classes are larger than the public schools. Its the methods used in teaching, the classes offered and the curriculum. And they are able to do it all without the state tests, so no "teaching to the test". I never said that the government should pay for a private school. But, I think that the public school systems should look at what works in those private schools and follow suit. If they did that, the need for private schools for any reason other than religion, would no longer be.

 

[Coconut36]

I agree.

I teach remedial math at community college. 40% of the students at my school need remedial math. That means 40% of the students are not up to Algebra II. That is abysmal.

It's not just that we aren't graduating enough students with higher math skills like trig or calc, but we are graduating people that barely have basic math skills. I have students who cannot do fractions, don't know their multiplication tables, have no understanding of basic scientific or math principles, and who are generally lacking the ability to think critically about math or science.

These are average students. They should be able to do better and we as a country should demand better. They are capable of learning the material, but we need to do a better job of teaching math and science.

My DH actually left math after many years teaching it because he just couldn't take it anymore. He taught middle school and would end up with kids who barely grasped multiplication or division..to then pile higher level math concepts on top of that was a disaster.

I can see in my own kids education that math seems to be bottom of the barrel..it's like "we will get to that at some point" and then they fly through concepts so quickly they don't have time to really "learn" it. Thank goodness for DH because we supplement both of them (even the Kinder kid) in math because it is so seriously lacking.

Kids don't seem to be gaining that foundation..the route memorization of basic math concepts or learning their "times tables" and such. So they lack that basis and then are expected to add, subtract, divide more complex things like fractions or progress into algebra and they can't because the time was not given for that foundation. So many teachers I know are beyond frustrated at the restrictions and requirements and what they are forced to do because they see the need but they can't address it.

 

[Coconut36]

I didn't say that any parent WOULD do those things. I asked if you were suggesting that. You said that is should be realistic that a parent should find a way to pay for it. I was simply pointing out that it isn't always realistic.

Tutoring is always free in our schools for any child that needs it. Like I said, its the challenging material, teaching them to their full potential that is something parents look for much more than tutoring.

As for private schools, here's the thing. Many of the parents here send their kids to one of the two major private schools in our area because of the educational opportunities they have. Its not small class size because truthfully, many of the classes are larger than the public schools. Its the methods used in teaching, the classes offered and the curriculum. And they are able to do it all without the state tests, so no "teaching to the test". I never said that the government should pay for a private school. But, I think that the public school systems should look at what works in those private schools and follow suit. If they did that, the need for private schools for any reason other than religion, would no longer be.

I said they should find a way to pay for private education. Private education is a want not a need. As a want yes parents need to pay for it. If they are stupid enough to cause themselves such financial distress they can't put food on the table or pay the light bill just for private school that is their problem..nobody is saying they should do that.

Not pay for tutoring..if I worded it poorly..my mistake. My point about supplementing their education in regards to challenge/tutoring is that parents need to find the resources to do this..that does not mean financially because there are tons of resources out there that don't cost a dime. A parent can do it, a family member, a friend, the schools..etc. I do feel it's a parents job to help their child when they need it..I didn't say that meant they had to take out a second mortgage or be unable to pay their bills because that isn't necessary.

Again..I said religion was ONE reason..I never said it was the only reason. It's great they like the way the private school teaches or like subjects they cover or like the staff or feel kids come out better for college..that is THEIR choice to send their child there because they want it for their child. It is their job to pay for that choice..not the Gov't because they want something specific for their child outside of what is provided for free..thus the parents need to foot the bill for what they want for their kid.

 

[luvsJack]

I said they should find a way to pay for private education. Private education is a want not a need. As a want yes parents need to pay for it. If they are stupid enough to cause themselves such financial distress they can't put food on the table or pay the light bill just for private school that is their problem..nobody is saying they should do that.

Not pay for tutoring..if I worded it poorly..my mistake. My point about supplementing their education in regards to challenge/tutoring is that parents need to find the resources to do this..that does not mean financially because there are tons of resources out there that don't cost a dime. A parent can do it, a family member, a friend, the schools..etc. I do feel it's a parents job to help their child when they need it..I didn't say that meant they had to take out a second mortgage or be unable to pay their bills because that isn't necessary.

Again..I said religion was ONE reason..I never said it was the only reason. It's great they like the way the private school teaches or like subjects they cover or like the staff or feel kids come out better for college..that is THEIR choice to send their child there because they want it for their child. It is their job to pay for that choice..not the Gov't because they want something specific for their child outside of what is provided for free..thus the parents need to foot the bill for what they want for their kid.

I am not sure why you keep saying that its the parents responsiblity to pay for private school. I never said it wasn't . I am also aware that you gave religion as one example. I am not trying to debate with you.

The fact is the students are graduating for the private schools (the ones here) with a better education than the students graduating from public school. Its not that the gov. needs to pay for a private education, its that the public schools need to step it up and give the same education as the private schools.

 

["Cinder" Ella's Mom]

I didn't say that any parent WOULD do those things. I asked if you were suggesting that. You said that is should be realistic that a parent should find a way to pay for it. I was simply pointing out that it isn't always realistic.

Tutoring is always free in our schools for any child that needs it. Like I said, its the challenging material, teaching them to their full potential that is something parents look for much more than tutoring.

As for private schools, here's the thing. Many of the parents here send their kids to one of the two major private schools in our area because of the educational opportunities they have. Its not small class size because truthfully, many of the classes are larger than the public schools. Its the methods used in teaching, the classes offered and the curriculum. And they are able to do it all without the state tests, so no "teaching to the test". I never said that the government should pay for a private school. But, I think that the public school systems should look at what works in those private schools and follow suit. If they did that, the need for private schools for any reason other than religion, would no longer be.

What "works" in a private school is something public schools do not control. Private schools have students whose parents PAY for them to be there. The investment of money and parental support is huge. Private schools control which kids they accept and which are rejected. They have the luxury of having a population that is controlled. When a student is disruptive, there is always the possibilty of removing that child from the learning environment. In public school, I see all kinds of students: those with supportive parents, those who live in housing projects, those who have failed so many times that they are 17 years old sitting in my freshman English class, those who hate school, those who love school, kids who work 8 hours a day after school and never complete a single homework assignment...
Public school is the real world and not all students will be successful. But I will try my best to make sure mine are!

 

[NHdisneylover]

That means the parents need to find the means to pay for it. Sorry but that is the reality of being a parent. If you don't have the resources to hire a tutor or bring in help then figure out how to do it yourself. The only way I would be OK with the Govt footing the bill for private or other means of education is if those institutions had to follow the exact same acceptance guidelines as a public school..meaning they take everyone and they have the same restrictions/regulations public school does. If one wants a specialized or exclusive education for their child it is up to them to pay for it. Nothing will convince me otherwise. There is a lot in life I might want or want for my child and it's up to me to pay for it...private or specialized education is the same. There is an option for those without means for private ed and if they deem it not for them then they need to find a way to pay for what they want.

There is an interesting article about Finland that highlights that what they were out to do was NOT t oget the best test scores (they were as surprised as anyone else!), but they WERE out to have equal chance for ALL kids. There are no private schools in Finland. No competition fostered between schools. No lists of the best schools. Etc. The article (I'll have to try to find it again and post a link) indicated that that was one big piece of their success. The article pointed out that Americans want to ignore that because we are so into competition and measurement and being able to give our own kids an edge--so you series of posts on this really struck me in comparison.

 

[Coconut36]

There is an interesting article about Finland that highlights that what they were out to do was NOT t oget the best test scores (they were as surprised as anyone else!), but they WERE out to have equal chance for ALL kids. There are no private schools in Finland. No competition fostered between schools. No lists of the best schools. Etc. The article (I'll have to try to find it again and post a link) indicated that that was one big piece of their success. The article pointed out that Americans want to ignore that because we are so into competition and measurement and being able to give our own kids an edge--so you series of posts on this really struck me in comparison.

I would have no issue if all schools were equal. My issue with Gov't funding private education is that private schools are exclusionary. I am not OK with that. If all schools operated in exactly the same manner in regards to who they accept and how they have to handle kids (as in public school has to keep taking the discipline problem back..private doesn't) then I would have no issue at all with it. But I am not OK with the idea of Gov't funding for a "want" for your child's education or for providing money to attend a school that can and will deny other students for whatever reason. If they took everyone, if they were all bound by the same requirements in regards to handling discipline problems..etc I am all for it..but until then I am not.

 

[Coconut36]

[QUOTE="Cinder" Ella's Mom;46404902]What "works" in a private school is something public schools do not control. Private schools have students whose parents PAY for them to be there. The investment of money and parental support is huge. Private schools control which kids they accept and which are rejected. They have the luxury of having a population that is controlled. When a student is disruptive, there is always the possibilty of removing that child from the learning environment. In public school, I see all kinds of students: those with supportive parents, those who live in housing projects, those who have failed so many times that they are 17 years old sitting in my freshman English class, those who hate school, those who love school, kids who work 8 hours a day after school and never complete a single homework assignment...
Public school is the real world and not all students will be successful. But I will try my best to make sure mine are![/QUOTE]

My biggest issue with Gov't paying for private education is that they are not equal in regards to student body. The private school can turn away or remove any student they decide to deny or remove..public can't do that. If they want Gov't money and open choices then they need to be a level playing field...they need to accept everyone a public school accepts because the Gov't is footing the bill for it...they would have to stop denying acceptance or removing students that a public school is required by law to educate.

 

[luvsJack]

[QUOTE="Cinder" Ella's Mom;46404902]What "works" in a private school is something public schools do not control. Private schools have students whose parents PAY for them to be there. The investment of money and parental support is huge. Private schools control which kids they accept and which are rejected. They have the luxury of having a population that is controlled. When a student is disruptive, there is always the possibilty of removing that child from the learning environment. In public school, I see all kinds of students: those with supportive parents, those who live in housing projects, those who have failed so many times that they are 17 years old sitting in my freshman English class, those who hate school, those who love school, kids who work 8 hours a day after school and never complete a single homework assignment...
Public school is the real world and not all students will be successful. But I will try my best to make sure mine are![/QUOTE}
Actually the two schools that I am talking about have less money than the public schools. So the parents paying would have little to do with the curriculum. They do control who goes there, to a point, but few kids are turned down.

I realize the reality of the students in public schools. You should hear some of the stuff dd comes home telling me!!!! SCARY stuff.

I am not saying that the teachers aren't as good or don't have the ability to teach. Most are as good or better than any teacher in the private schools. That's not it. Its not the fault of the teachers--at ALL.

Its the curriculum and what the teachers are allowed to do with it. A kid that doesn't care about school isn't going to care regardless of what you offer him. A parent that doesn't care isn't going to care either way either. The kids and parents that do care should not suffer because of them.

While I think, in some respects that the state, subject area tests have put more emphasis on those subjects. The fact is after the student passes that test, it stops. Ours are Alg, Bio, US History and Eng. So, this year dd will take Alg and Bio. They learning by leaps and bounds in those two subjects. Her Biology is bascially the same class I took at comm. college. So that's great. But her next science class is not going to go above and beyond because there is no test to worry about.

Back that up and look at middle school. The teachers are literally teaching to the test (at the school dd went to). So mostly what they do all year is learn how to take a test. There are some wonderful teachers that are not able to use their talent for teaching because the administration is more concerned that the kids know how to color in that little oval than they are about them knowing the material.

The private schools here do not take those same tests, their teachers are not bound by what is on those tests and no one is teaching to the test. And they are not held responsible for the kid that doesn't want to learn. And yet the kids are learning more.

IMHO, the problem is not the kids that don't care or the parents that don't care--those have always existed. Its the limitation put on our teachers because of those "oh, so important" tests.

 

[luvsJack]

There is an interesting article about Finland that highlights that what they were out to do was NOT t oget the best test scores (they were as surprised as anyone else!), but they WERE out to have equal chance for ALL kids. There are no private schools in Finland. No competition fostered between schools. No lists of the best schools. Etc. The article (I'll have to try to find it again and post a link) indicated that that was one big piece of their success. The article pointed out that Americans want to ignore that because we are so into competition and measurement and being able to give our own kids an edge--so you series of posts on this really struck me in comparison.

That is interesting to me. That was sort of what I was trying to point out about these private schools that I am talking about. They are not worrying about what the kids will score on the state test because they don't take them.

Our system is so concerned with comparing test scores that true education is being lost.