I have various thoughts
When kids are not meeting standards, how much is the teachers' fault, the school system's fault, the state's fault, or the parents' fault?
How much focus these days is put more on sports and arts instead of academics? All kinds of accolades for a team that does well. We heard so much about Siena recently in the basketball tournament. What about academic successes of the complete student body? How much does the news media do about about that (other than the parents submitting a graduation notice for their own child). Remember, what was it, Schenectady High School and their basket ball team, the city had a parade for them. What about educational wins?
Teachers haven't been able to discipline kids the way it was done decades ago. Gosh, I would bet they can't even criticize a student in front of the class. As a child in maybe a science class, I can't remember, something learing about the foods, and green vegetables, my teacher announced/stated/said/etc, that I would not eat peas and broccoli. Parents and teachers worked together back then. I know, my parents were in cahoots with the teacher. I don't remember if I was embarrassed, I don't remember if the other classmates teased me (maybe they cheered for me defying my parents) or what. I know I started eating peas and broccholi, I really never developed a taste for broccoli however, and generally avoid it today, but I am big on other greens. But today, I'm sure a teacher could never say anything like that in front of the class, that a student won't eat his or her veggies. School system would probably be sued.
If you were a child and you caught sight of a bee in a flower and your parent told you to stay away, would you necessarily obey them? If they told you to take a time out because you failed to obey their order regarding getting close to the bee, would that really teach you to avoid bees? But if you got stung by a bee, wow, that hurts. If you got stung once don't you think that you would probably run from a bee in the future and your parent wouldn't have to say a word? Why? Because the bee sting hurt. You felt it, you cried, you screamed OUCH, and from that you learned, don't ever go near a bee again, don't bother a bee, etc. Think of a very young child going toward an electrical outlet. How well will it work if parent says "junior, don't touch." How much will the child learn if parents puts child in time out for going near the outlet? But if junior got a slap on the hand, won't that work like a bee sting? OUCH, junior cries, junior screams, and junior will most likely not do that again. When you were a child, did your parent slap your hand or give you a whack on the butt? So what's wrong with a spanking? We've got a generation of kids in the "post spanking" days that think nothing of telling a police officer "F" you when a cop tries to verbally give them an order. No wonder those hoodlums beat up that guy in Schenectady a few weeks ago.
But that brings to mind something else. Those hoodlum kids, those juvenile delinquents, what were they doing outside at that hour of the night? OK, they can't have a city directed curfiew (according to the ACLU anyway). But what were the parents doing? Why weren't the parents supervising them (even if the kids were on vacation and thus probably the reason why they weren't home in bed sleeping for school in the morning). But this brings up another problem. Parents don't care and that's a problem too. And so too with the education of their children. Unfortunately many parents think of the school as a babysitter rather than an place to get an education. The law says kids have to go to school, so parents these days enroll them. But I'm sure there are many parents who just don't give a hoot. If the child is failing, teachers probably call the parent for a conference and the parents just don't go in many cases I'm sure. And without parents insuring their kids are doing their homework and studying at home, the kids arent' going to suceed.
Teachers probably do spend too much time "teaching to the test." Tests are needed and I even thing standardized tests are needed. Don't we need to be assured that every child, in public school, in private school, and homeschooled are all providing the same (correct) answer that 2+2=4? They might learn differently and arrive at the answer differently, but as long as the answer is always 4. But teachers should not be spending the teaching time doing practice tests, making the kids all worried about taking the tests to the point they are more focused on whether they will pass or fail. And the schools are too worried about the test. If the teachers would teach arithmetic, and if they are given homework to let it sink in after class is over, and if the parents will insure the kids are studying, then the kids should pass fine.
I was half watching Schenectady's council meeting tonight and heard some minister using that term "it takes a village to raise a child." I generally prefer the government stay out of raising my children. But then again, we've been responsible parents. We oversee their education, are involved parents, etc. And our children do well, and are generally the obedient type, etc. (yes, they did get a few whacks, and yes, I do believe there is a difference between a spanking or a slap vs. a beating). We have our values and I prefer that our children not be taught that it's perfectly OK to have sex as a teen and just use birth control and if you get pregnant you can keep it a secret from your parents and go have an abortion. However, should the village and to what extent should the village step in and take a greater role. Sometimes I wonder if there should be a greater extent that children be removed from the home for neglect and lack of supervision.
There is another issue. Standards. We do far worse than other countries who place greater emphasis on academics. Look at the increasing population of foreigners who are gracing our places of work as scientists, doctors, computer experts, etc. So we hear how standards need to be raised. And as soon as the educational professionals talk about raising standards, and standards that need to be met, we hear the public whining that the kids can't do it, so delay the higher standards or don't institute them at all. My parents over the winter were cleaning out sort of their attic and they saved of our report cards. Wow, the passing grade was 75 back then. I was talking to a former classmates and also to a co-worker who thought they remember the passing grade being 65. I think regents ultimately went to 55, I'm not sure if it's still 55, I think it was that grade the regents was trying to raise and so "experts" and probably some parents, screamed that the kids could not attain a higher passing grade.
And then there is the teachers unions who are only interested in getting more members so they get more money so the unions, like that commercial for SUNY, put out those ads saying more teachers are needed as SUNY in order for kids to succeed. We had one principal, one secretary, a school nurse, a janitor, and one teacher per class when I was in grade school. And I think we were about 35 students per class. How come we all passed with scores of 75? But today, with passing grades of 55, a couple teachers and a host of teacher aids in class sizes of maybe 15 or 20, the kids don't learn? But then, does that go back to the parents not doing their job? Is it due to too much focus on other than the academics, the three R's? Is it medicarded kids with imaginary disorders that gives the schools more of our hard earned tax dollars which makes the unions happy with more membership means more dues, so fine, don't go after parents who don't parent, keep the kids with them which the unions will be happy because more teachers means more dues. OK, I repeated some of that, but I don't have time to structure that sentence with each thought of what occurrence will cause another effect, if you know what I mean.
Well, to sum it up, I don't know what the main problem is or what the major solution is, but rather just giving thoughts
|
Logged
