W
I read the article and guess what......it is a classic way to perpetuate the liberal theology. That is what a lot of folks desire the education system to be anyway. Why not go for it. No rules, no one in authority to whom you have to answer, no need to modify your behavior for any reason, just learn what you want, how you want, when you want just as long as it suits you. So what if you can't construct a sentence or spell correctly (topper and Jarod come to mind)....Who cares if you don't learn anything about how government works (many of my acquaintences who are not on political message boards)....It doesn't matter if you don't learn about our nations history....we want to erase it anyway. Yep, sounds like the way to reform and make better to me. 
Last edited:
W
WinterBorn
Guest
I read the article and guess what......it is a classic way to raise perpetuate the liberal theology. That is what a lot of folks desire the education system to be anyway. Why not go for it. No rules, no one in authority to whom you have to answer, no need to modify your behavior for any reason, just learn what you want, how you want, when you want just as long as it suits you. So what if you can't construct a sentence or spell correctly (topper and Jarod come to mind)....Who cares if you don't learn anything about how government works (many of my acquaintences who are not on political message boards)....It doesn't matter if you don't learn about our nations history....we want to erase it anyway. Yep, sounds like the way to reform and make better to me.
Did we read the same article?
The current education system is in a shambles because the current "memorize and regurgitate for the test" has failed. We don't teach students to think, be independent, or even how to learn & study. We spend so much time focused on nonsense that we have graduated generations of kids who were not taught to think for themselves.
And are the kids learning to construct sentences now? Or are they being taught how government works? A simple examination of todays public shows they are not.
Topspin
Verified User
I read the article and guess what......it is a classic way to raise perpetuate the liberal theology. That is what a lot of folks desire the education system to be anyway. Why not go for it. No rules, no one in authority to whom you have to answer, no need to modify your behavior for any reason, just learn what you want, how you want, when you want just as long as it suits you. So what if you can't construct a sentence or spell correctly (topper and Jarod come to mind)....Who cares if you don't learn anything about how government works (many of my acquaintences who are not on political message boards)....It doesn't matter if you don't learn about our nations history....we want to erase it anyway. Yep, sounds like the way to reform and make better to me.
fuck you and the high horse you road in on ya tool
Topspin
Verified User
I'm with oncelor pay teachers. You are nowhere near getting the best and brightes.
Our colleges are the worlds best, why?
No give aways, you have to earn your degrees and competion in the class is tough.
Parents today want to coddle thier little ones and are happy with the no one fails approach.
Our colleges are the worlds best, why?
No give aways, you have to earn your degrees and competion in the class is tough.
Parents today want to coddle thier little ones and are happy with the no one fails approach.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
whats the measure of performance?
I wouldn't argue that as a good starter since I am a teacher in one of the lowest paid states. But I definitely would add a few things.
1. Eliminate social promotion so that kids are accountable for learning what they're supposed to.
2. Monitor teachers more closely to identify those who are not doing their jobs (they're out there).
3. Streamline curriculum in elementary school to eliminate so much of the fluff that is so "necessary" for the kids to learn.
4. Make special education "special" again.
I could go on...but I won't.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
I wouldn't argue that as a good starter since I am a teacher in one of the lowest paid states. But I definitely would add a few things.
1. Eliminate social promotion so that kids are accountable for learning what they're supposed to.
2. Monitor teachers more closely to identify those who are not doing their jobs (they're out there).
3. Streamline curriculum in elementary school to eliminate so much of the fluff that is so "necessary" for the kids to learn.
4. Make special education "special" again.
I could go on...but I won't.
I agree with those. I am not sure which would be fluff that could be eliminated. But there is a lot of stuff that is a waste of time.
Topspin
Verified User
I wouldn't argue that as a good starter since I am a teacher in one of the lowest paid states. But I definitely would add a few things.
1. Eliminate social promotion so that kids are accountable for learning what they're supposed to.
2. Monitor teachers more closely to identify those who are not doing their jobs (they're out there).
3. Streamline curriculum in elementary school to eliminate so much of the fluff that is so "necessary" for the kids to learn.
4. Make special education "special" again.
I could go on...but I won't.
I agree, then we'd get much better quality teachers than the bottom of the student body we get now who are ok with not making shit for a living.
In elementary school I see no need for teacher to have to take the time or make the effort to teach a 2nd grader about Drama or teach them to be able to distinguish between a Rembrandt or a Picasso. It is my opinion that certain things should be saved and introduced in higher grades after some basics are learned and learned well.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
While I do agree with the above, it should be done in conjunction with eliminating admin costs that seem to run so high in the public schools relative to private schools.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
like 6 figure salaries for inept ISD commissioners
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
In this case your misusing the word liberal by using it as a right wing political pejorative. There's no greater means of intellectually handicapping a child then providing them a conservative education. There's pretty damned good reason why the overwhelming majority of our educational institutions, both private and public, are based on the liberal arts model. Because it not only works but it provides a broader, deeper, more versatile and adaptable form of education.I read the article and guess what......it is a classic way to raise perpetuate the liberal theology. That is what a lot of folks desire the education system to be anyway. Why not go for it. No rules, no one in authority to whom you have to answer, no need to modify your behavior for any reason, just learn what you want, how you want, when you want just as long as it suits you. So what if you can't construct a sentence or spell correctly (topper and Jarod come to mind)....Who cares if you don't learn anything about how government works (many of my acquaintences who are not on political message boards)....It doesn't matter if you don't learn about our nations history....we want to erase it anyway. Yep, sounds like the way to reform and make better to me.
The authors criticisms are valid. He is not advocating eliminating skills training or discipline but he is correct in identifying why our schools are having troubles competing with the students of other developed nations and why so many are unprepared to perform modern college/university level work. To much reliance on skills training and obedience.
Our nations primary and secondary educational systems are not geared to teach the broad/liberal educational skills required for higher tertiary education and individual development. In short, they don't teach students to think, create or solve abstract problems. What they are geared to do is provide large numbers of obedient, literate and numerate workers for McDonalds and Wallmart and corporate cubicle customer service drones that can peform simple repetative tasks. The problem is, this system is not meeting the nations demands for highly talented individuals with multiple and versatile skill sets that this nation needs to be competative in our modern and highly technological world.
Discipline in school is important but to much emphasis on conformity stiffles the natural instincts children have to explore and broaden their horizons. Learning skills is important but there is a limit to how far memorizing the multiplication tables will get you if you don't learn how to conceptualize a problem, model that problem mathametically, then formulate solutions and proofs to that problem. Skills training alone won't teach children how to do that. The same is true in science. Memorizing a bunch of facts, won't teach a child how to postulate a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, evaluate the variables being tested, analyze the data obtained and draw conclusions from that based upon the data and then apply those conclusions to solve other problems. This is why just learing science skills is of little value with out the practical laboratory experience of how to apply those skills.
In elementary school I see no need for teacher to have to take the time or make the effort to teach a 2nd grader about Drama or teach them to be able to distinguish between a Rembrandt or a Picasso. It is my opinion that certain things should be saved and introduced in higher grades after some basics are learned and learned well.
I can agree with this also. I am not for consolidation of schools but I am for consolidation of the oversight of the ones that exist.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's a great question. How do you measure performance? Educational systems are not for profits so you can't measure performance by the bottom line. Primary and Secondary educators are not researchers so the publish or perish paradigm of Colleges/Universities don't apply.
In most non-profit organizations pay is based on academic acheivement. Those with advanced degrees, training in more demanding subjects, certification in specific skills should have a large part to play in teachers compensation.
If for example, as a community , we set the following standards for a high school.
20% of the teachers will have PhDs
40% will have Masters
20% will have a BA/BS in science or engineering.
20% will have a BA/BS in the liberal arts
A sliding pay scale could then be used (this is just a crude example).
A PhD recieves $80,000 kpy
A Master recieves $60 kpy
A BA/BS science/engineering $50 kpy
A BA/BS Liberal Arts $40 kpy.
Annual performance evaluations would be used to some degree for annual salary adjustments but would primarily be used to evaluate the teachers competence in the subjects they are teaching as well as evaluating their students progress in those subjects.
Performance evaluations alone are inadequate because what happens to a highy educated, skilled and motivated educator who is teaching in a disadvantaged areas like many urban or rural regions? They get punished and disinsentivised to teach in these areas because of poor student peformance. In other words, we want as many PhD's teaching in poor rura/urban schools as we do in wealthy suburban communities.
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Yea, I heard that about PE and Art and so they eliminated those. Now we have a bunch of fat kids who have to sample music from the 70's to make an album.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
pay raises based on performance standards by degree would be a piss poor method if students are still not being taught. All that kind of standard does is motivate teachers to continue going to night school for themselves.