Slashdot Mirror


Why Is It So Difficult To Fire Bad Teachers?

Ant writes with this depressing story about how public schools sometimes work: "This six-page Los Angeles Times article shares its investigation to find 'the process [of firing poor teachers] so arduous that many school principals don't even try (One-page version), except in the very worst cases. Jettisoning a teacher solely because he or she can't teach is rare ...'"

150 of 1,322 comments (clear)

  1. Public education... by chunk08 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The erroneous assumption is to the effort that the aim of public education is to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence .... Nothing could be further from the truth." Not sure where that quote is from, but it's good and I had it lying around.

    --
    Do away with our corrupt tax code. Support the Fair Tax
    1. Re:Public education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're right. Public education is the effort of the government to institutionalize our young to prep them for factory or other menial jobs. Also it is used to make them obey authority and brain wash them to cultural "moral standards".

    2. Re:Public education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe higher education, but grade school is used to disenfranchise our youth and make sure they obey authority unquestioningly. Very little is taught in grade school, instead they make sure youth are ready for menial tasks like flipping burgers and counting cashier tills. "No Child Left Behind" should be called "No Education Located Here".

    3. Re:Public education... by an.echte.trilingue · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It is from HL Mencken, The American Mercury, April, 1924. The sentiment goes back at least to JJ Rouseau.

      Here is a great quote from the article:

      Building a case for dismissal is so time-consuming, costly and draining for principals and administrators that many say they don't make the effort except in the most egregious cases. The vast majority of firings stem from blatant misconduct, including sexual abuse, other immoral or illegal behavior, insubordination or repeated violation of rules such as showing up on time.

      Either the journalist is a product of the LA school system or the LA school system mandates that teachers show up late.

      More to the point, however, is that this is actually not such a bad system, no matter what populist journalists wishing to stir up anti-(government|teacher's union) sentiment says. As somebody with managerial experience in the federal government, I can attest that establishing a pattern of misconduct is a very effective way to get people fired. However, it requires that administrators keep their paperwork in order. There has to be a written record in place establishing that the misconduct actually happened. This requirement is a good thing in government positions because it keeps people from getting fired for political reasons and thus helps prevent nepotism and cronyism. The horror stories that you hear about the impossibility of firing bad employees always come from inept administrators who could not be bothered to properly manage their personnel and want to blame the system for their failings.

      --
      weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
    4. Re:Public education... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I appreciate that it must be hard to strike a fair balance of evidence when it comes to firing people, but just how would one make a specific record of incidents of misconduct when a teacher is simply crap at their job?

      Not only is any direct measurement very subjective, an objective measurement (exam grades achieved by children) is skewed by so many factors it's not even funny and even brings in its own set of problems - it's more dependent on the children who happen to be in the class than the teacher to begin with, and since it is often used despite that it means that most teachers (even the good ones) are forced to teach to an exam syllabus rather than actually providing a rounded understanding of a subject.

    5. Re:Public education... by leucadiadude · · Score: 3, Insightful

      insubordination or repeated violation of rules such as showing up on time.

      Either the journalist is a product of the LA school system or the LA school system mandates that teachers show up late.

      Looks more like YOU are a product of the LA school system. The reporters usage is correct. He is talking about a rule, i.e., the rule to show up on time.

    6. Re:Public education... by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Leftist feel-good cirriculums dominate

      Are you ignorant? First of all, the "feel-good" curricula (wow, incorrect spelling and incorrect use of the plural, is that because all those mean liberals didn't teach you correctly?) was mainly a right-wing strawman. Secondly, NCLB is pretty much the opposite of feel-good curricula, and it hasn't really helped matters, eh?

      Support the Fair Tax. http://fairtax.org/ Promote peace, kill more bad guys.


      Oh, guess you ARE ignorant.

    7. Re:Public education... by apoc.famine · · Score: 3, Informative

      My personal theory is that it's to teach them to take standardized tests.
       
      Drivers permit/license
      SAT/ACT
      GRE
      Industry Certifications
      Boards
       
      That, or it's to teach people to work line shifts. Turn on, turn off. Do job a, switch to job b, switch to job c, then go home when the whistle sounds.
       
      It's CLEARLY not designed for learning.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    8. Re:Public education... by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Informative

      Three highschools, two elementary schools, and a middle school, all spread across three states at opposite coasts. In elementary school we got the DARE treatment about how ALL drugs were The Devil, in middle school they kept on with that and went on to abstinence bible thumping, and in all three highschools they outright lied to promote the abstinence agenda.

      As a bonus in one of the highschools the principal banned all mentions of south africa because he thought we shouldn't care so much about other race's problems.

      Oh and all of these, like pretty much every other school in the country, were Zero Tolerance schools. What kind of liberalism should I have looked out for because every school I've ever been to from florida to oregon has been more religious right than bleeding heart liberal.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    9. Re:Public education... by joeme1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with raising teacher pay is that it will attract more people. Teaching is not something that everyone is good at. Just because you can get a doctorate doesn't mean you have the skill. There is a big difference. Raising teacher pay could attract worse teachers that do it for the money. People who really want to teach, such as myself, will often take a cut in pay to do so. I have been working manual labor for a long time while taking classes to become an educator. When I take my first teaching job, assuming I do it here in Nebraska, I will go from ~$32,000/yr to ~$28,000 if I don't do anything but teach. That's a huge cut when a person has three kids to feed, but it is what I love doing. Sure, I'd love to get paid more, but I also want kids to learn from people who LOVE teaching.

    10. Re:Public education... by Swizec · · Score: 4, Informative
      It's not, but curriculum can be quite happily pluralised just like any other noun as per the dictionary - both forms are accepted:

      curâ...ricâ...uâ...lum [kuh-rik-yuh-luhm] Show IPA â"noun, plural -la [-luh] Show IPA , -lums.
      1. the aggregate of courses of study given in a school, college, university, etc.: The school is adding more science courses to its curriculum.
      2. the regular or a particular course of study in a school, college, etc.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=curriculum&x=0&y=0

    11. Re:Public education... by jeremy+charles+q · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You might take a long, hard look at your hypothesis, as the school system is essentially a liberal enclave.

      I can't see how that could possibly be a bad thing.

      I can, every teacher I have met has pushed me to vote one side over the other (take a guess which side). Not that there is any thing wrong with voting one side over the other, Its just that in that situation there shouldn't be any bias where definitely is one.

    12. Re:Public education... by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And that my friend is a sign of hypercorrection

      Actually, it's not; it's an example of preferring a one plural form over another, more or less equally, acceptable one:

      curriculum
      n. pl. curricula or curriculums

      (from here).

      And what's more, curricula is actually more common than curriculums, judging by the number of Google hits (~12.7 million to 2.2 million, respectively). At very worst, what he did was impose one of his pet peeves on the conversation, in a dickish way that added nothing of value and served to undermine his point.

      You, on the other hand, decided to blame your own ignorance and lack of research on someone else's supposed shortcomings, and justify it with a fabricated "rule," that ignores the actual facts and history of the language. He's a schmuck; you're an ignoramus, and an arrogant one at that.

    13. Re:Public education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You might take a long, hard look at your hypothesis, as the school system is essentially a liberal enclave.

      Probably because they tried to teach you a bit about reality, which is notorious for its liberal bias.

    14. Re:Public education... by BCW2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And has been so every since the NEA bribed and conned every state legislature to require an "education" degree to get a teacher certification. In the early 70's my high school annual listed each teachers degree. They had at least a bachelors in the subject being taught. The listing ended in 74, wonder what they are hiding? When a bachelors in "education" became the primary focus, test scores started dropping. All any College of Education is at any University is the NEA's indoctrination school for left wing teaching.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    15. Re:Public education... by mustafap · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >History? Who cares what happened centuries ago.

      Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

      Also, when you grow up, you'll find your ability to engage with other intelligent people rather limited. Not everyone likes to talk about computing.

      I speak from experience.

      There, that was a history lesson. Now go read the post from the beginning :o)

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    16. Re:Public education... by edumacator · · Score: 4, Informative

      Welcome to the club man. It's a pain in the ass but worth every minute of it. Just don't forget that part about loving teaching.

    17. Re:Public education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, I and a lot of people I know discounted teaching not because we aren't interested in teaching, but because for us it's not the difference between $32K and $28K, but the difference between $110K and $40K.

      I hope to retire into teaching, but I'd like to be able to more than subsist.

    18. Re:Public education... by SignalFreq · · Score: 5, Informative

      Cut the teamism. Education has been fucked up long before NCLB. In fact, it is a liberal enclave and the left has used "do it for the children" as a means of gaining power for themselves and the teachers union for 40 years.

      Biased much? Did you ever stop to think that maybe the liberals actually want to help the children? Especially since the United States maintains its world position through education (though not for long). And do you realize that conservatives have favored government education mandates and control (through funding) since at least Reagan, except with the extreme right in recent years and its anti-science agenda?

      We throw WAY too much money at education. Much of it doesn't go to the classroom and teachers where it should. Rather it goes to administration.

      The US spends approximately 3.4% of its GDP on public primary and secondary education. That is less than Denmark, Sweden, Finland, France, Austria, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Ireland, UK, Spain, the EU as a whole, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Cyprus, Poland, Malta, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, just to name a few. It is, however, about equal with Greece.

      Leftist feel-good cirriculums dominate and as such our kids learn to either throw a ball or drop fries.

      Leftist? Do you realize that our curriculum is very moderate compared to most of the world?

      Science and math skills tank but we have happy little taxpayers who learn to vote in all the politically correct garbage they read in the "picture books" they were given in grade school.

      Do you have any figures to back that up? No. How about this: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf

      By grade eight, the United States out performed 37 of 47 countries in Math, being primarily beat by 5 Asian countries (Taipei, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, Japan) and equal to European countries (Hungary, England, Russian Federation, Lithuania, Czech Republic).

      Also according to this study, the US has been improving average scores since it began tracking (1995). We are behind Asian countries because Asian school systems work harder, having much longer school years (220 days average vs 180 days in the US). Asian schools are often 6 days a week, 8 hours a day.

      CUT the funding, limit the course work to what matters, fire administrators, and raise teachers' pay to attract our brightest to the field. Otherwise, stop bitching about education and stop using my tax dollars to fund this toilet.

      How exactly are you going to cut the funding AND raise teachers' pay? I agree that we need to raise teachers' pay, but we should do it by increasing educational spending and cutting some spending elsewhere ($16 Billion a year in farm subsidies? $613 Billion a year on Defense? $48 Billion in earmarks?)

      The US has been in a slight population boom since 1992, meaning more children to educate (approximately 11% increase). The US still has the largest percentage of the population completing upper secondary education (HS) of all countries in the world except Japan, and over the past forty years it has steadily increased (81% in 1960 to 87%). The US also has the largest percentage of the population completing higher education (college/university degree) in the world at 27 percent.

      The US also has one of the worst student to teacher ratios in the world, averaging out to 16, but in lower income schools averaging over 35.

      http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003026.pdf

    19. Re:Public education... by Brett+Buck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only is any direct measurement very subjective, an objective measurement (exam grades achieved by children) is skewed by so many factors it's not even funny and even brings in its own set of problems - it's more dependent on the children who happen to be in the class than the teacher to begin with, and since it is often used despite that it means that most teachers (even the good ones) are forced to teach to an exam syllabus rather than actually providing a rounded understanding of a subject.

      But you have to remember that the entire reason that the exams were instituted for a very good reason. Part of a hypothetical "rounded understanding of a subject" is actually being competent in the basic skills associated with the topic. That wasn't happening in many many cases. "Rounded Understanding" isn't possible until "basic understanding" has been achieved. Even if ALL they do it end up teaching the test, that's still a hell of a lot better than teaching nothing at all and graduating students that don't have basic skills required to function. That's what was happening (and still is, in a lot of cases) and that's why, in the large, that the testing was instituted.

                Brett

    20. Re:Public education... by Brickwall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, you might expand your own horizons. Try reading Marshall Macluhan, for example. He posited that the reason for the growth of structured classrooms in the late 19th century was to provide a ready stream of workers for factories, who could 1) read enough to understand simple instructions, 2) do some simple arithmetic to keep records, and, most important, 3) be conditioned to sit at a bell, eat lunch at a bell, go home at a bell, etc. Employing his maxim "The medium is the message", he felt that the actual content of most classes was meaningless compared to the impact of rows of desks, submission to authority, and living to an artificial schedule, just as the message of the car (highways, suburbs, dependence on oil) is orders of magnitude more important than the content of any given automobile (unless I'm in it, of course).

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
    21. Re:Public education... by obarthelemy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm hoping this is a joke ?

      Arts and music are for many what makes life worth it. Not having a chance at being exposed to those, at least once, in school, would be very sad for many kids who have no chance to look into it at home. I still remember art projects I did in junior high.

      History is totally superfluous. Except if you want a chance to stand back and understand what is happening today, and not repeat yesterday's mistakes.

      Sport is not only about being fit. It's about social skills, strategy, coordination, getting acquainted or re-aqcuainted with your body... Not eveybody wants to be a gym rat, some do actually want to have fun. Again, kids deserve a chance to try that out.

      I do agree about religion... I'd like philosophy instead.

      The school you want is a very dull one.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    22. Re:Public education... by tsm_sf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure we do, we just go to different bars and don't invite you to our parties.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    23. Re:Public education... by DeadChobi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can tell you from first hand experience that if you want to improve the quality of education every child recieves, the first thing you can start with is bringing the teacher to student ratio from 25-30 down to 15-20. Quite honestly, most classrooms I've been in can barely support the 30 -35 students in them. In the school I'm student teaching in, they're looking at a 40:1 or 50:1 ratio next year due to budget cuts. I can't imagine doing anything but lecturing in an environment like that. And it'll be impossible to grade more than a few things a week with 250-300 students.

      The biggest issue with the school that I'm teaching in is that ratio, because it means I can't move around my classroom or arrange students in any way other than a block-style. The block-style seating arrangement means I can't circulate to assess my students as effectively. It means that I'm stuck at the front of the room talking at students. It makes it very difficult to group students for effective instruction. In short, it screws me out of a lot of strategies I could use to more effectively teach.

      It also means that my students are discouraged from talking with one-another about the material, which means that they can't scaffold for each other as effectively.

      --
      SRSLY.
    24. Re:Public education... by MikeBabcock · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the first things I taught my daughter about school is that her teacher is not infallible, that everything she learns at school isn't necessarily true and that doing her homework the way the teacher wants it done anyway is how she'll get good grades.

      "Daddy, my teacher said that Google is not a number like you said it is." "That's okay, just tell her its a one with a million zeros after it, and if she doesn't believe you, say okay and feel good about knowing something she doesn't."

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    25. Re:Public education... by mazarin5 · · Score: 4, Funny

      My son came back from his classes in favor of a second term for Bush. It didn't really matter because he was 5.

      --
      Fnord.
    26. Re:Public education... by Rebelgecko · · Score: 4, Informative

      Moreover, she shouldn't believe that her parents are infallible either. Google is a mispelling of Googol, which is actually just 1x10^100. If you'd like, you can Google it :)

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    27. Re:Public education... by duffbeer703 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look at a state like NY where the education unions have forced the state to provide funding to lower average class sizes and raise teacher salaries.

      Now teachers average $65k/year and class sizes are decreased dramatically. The urban district where where I live has an average class of 19. When I attended school in NYC in the early 80's, it was 30+.

      Guess what? Performance still sucks, particularly for the lost generation of urban youth growing up in broken households, with parents who don't care and a culture that embraces ignorance and dependency.

      It sucks in the burbs too, where the precious Connors and Jennifers get B's in watered down classes and have an inflated view of their own abilities.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    28. Re:Public education... by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the first thing you can start with is bringing the teacher to student ratio from 25-30 down to 15-20

      I agree with you 100%. But this is definitely a resource problem. Ask most parents, and they would agree they would like to see better student/teacher ratios. Ask them if they are willing to pay twice as much in state and local taxes to achieve this, and I suspect you'll get a much different answer! Other than relying more heavily on volunteers and getting rid of some district administrative staff, I really don't know how to deal with this issue.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    29. Re:Public education... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Interesting

      When I take my first teaching job, assuming I do it here in Nebraska, I will go from ~$32,000/yr to ~$28,000 if I don't do anything but teach. That's a huge cut when a person has three kids to feed, but it is what I love doing. Sure, I'd love to get paid more, but I also want kids to learn from people who LOVE teaching.

      Please forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't you have 3 months a year to do some other work to make up a chunk of that difference? Or do teachers end up working during summer break?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    30. Re:Public education... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then what do you suggest be cut? English? Reading? Math? Science?

      There's not much low-hanging fruit left in most curricula, but one suggestion would be penmanship. I still resent the hundreds of hours I spent being forced to practice a completely worthless skill in second through fourth grade. My school could have put that time to much better use.

    31. Re:Public education... by inviolet · · Score: 4, Funny

      Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

      ...whereas those who study history will recognize it when they are repeating it.

      /sorry, feeling cynical tonight

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    32. Re:Public education... by nomadic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only educational idea we should adopt from Starship Troopers is co-ed showers...

    33. Re:Public education... by jim_deane · · Score: 5, Informative

      Please forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't you have 3 months a year to do some other work to make up a chunk of that difference? Or do teachers end up working during summer break?

      The break varies, in my district it is 9-10 weeks. Most teachers are required to take continuing education to maintain their licenses, and many of those classes, workshops, and other professional activities are done in the summer to accommodate teacher schedules.

      For example, I would love to get a part time job this summer--and I am looking--but I have a week-long workshop in June, and a few other job-related full-day commitments before the end of the summer. Many employers are not interested due to the swiss-cheese scheduling that is required to accommodate my professional obligations.

    34. Re:Public education... by Bootsy+Collins · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with raising teacher pay is that it will attract more people. Teaching is not something that everyone is good at. Just because you can get a doctorate doesn't mean you have the skill. There is a big difference. Raising teacher pay could attract worse teachers that do it for the money. People who really want to teach, such as myself, will often take a cut in pay to do so.

      Yes, I agree, some people who are good teachers are willing to take a pay cut to teach. But others who would also be good teachers opt to do something else because they don't want to be paid so poorly. Your approach guarantees that the teacher population is made up of two groups: 1) people who are so committed to teaching that they don't mind the low pay (good) and 2) people that take the teaching job because it's the best they can get (bad).

      I swear to god, teaching is the only profession where people seemingly earnestly make the argument that improving pay won't improve the pool of job candidates. In every other profession on the planet, people raise the pay to attract higher-quality candidates and use competition for jobs between the candidates to select the best ones from that pool of candidates.

      Yes, you're right. Raising teacher pay will attract more people. Then, we do our best to hire the ones who will be best at teaching. With a larger pool of applicants than before (including the applicants who would have been there anyway at a lower pay point, but also a bunch of new applicants as well), how can you argue that we'll end up with worse teachers than if we paid them bus fare and had the smaller applicant pool? That really strains the boundaries of logic.

    35. Re:Public education... by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      do they honestly pay teachers that poorly in the states?

      here in Soviet Canuckistan, my friend just got hired as a full time teacher, and he's set to earn $90,000 a year.

      on one hand, higher pay for teachers can potentially attract a lot of bad teachers who only take the job for the 7 hour days and 2 months off each summer, but providing such a low salary will turn away a lot of good teachers. a good balance must be reached.
      Education is probably the most important thing in society, and good teachers must be rewarded for their essential role in it.

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
    36. Re:Public education... by Devout_IPUite · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Teachers work harder than you 9 months a year. Taking 1.5 months off (it's about 2.5 months for the students, but the teachers have clean up, seminars, and set up in that time) is something that we really shouldn't begrudge them.

    37. Re:Public education... by techno-vampire · · Score: 3, Interesting
      "No Child Left Behind" should be called "No Education Located Here".

      More accurate is, "No Child Gets Ahead."

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    38. Re:Public education... by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      on one hand, higher pay for teachers can potentially attract a lot of bad teachers

      No, it will attract bad applicants. You don't have to hire them. And the more applicants you have, the more selective you can be.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Is "why" a legitimate question? by Brett+Buck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's blatantly obvious, the NEA is exceptionally powerful and won't permit it.

            Brett

  3. Labor Economics by snwyvern · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seeing the result of poor education is an easy task. It's even easy to identify poor teachers by merit and/or performance... The difficulty comes in establishing universal standards that will do that by a set of static rules. Of course there are the pandemic issues with unions and so on. My spouse is a teacher, and several friends I graduated with are in education, and the story (at least in Colorado) is the same: The Union only steps in for members of the herd that are to be culled. In more... sane... states (our state is the lowest in Higher Education funding by several orders of magnitude) your mileage may vary.

    1. Re:Labor Economics by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about Students, give students an anonymous evaluation form to put their feelings of teachers on them, then when the time comes to get rid of unnecessary teachers, its easier to get rid of the ones where the students can't learn in. Because, most students can easily identify teachers they don't like and can't learn from, and face it, even if you have a PhD in mathematics, yet your algebra students are totally confused, you aren't doing your job as a teacher and should be let go.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Labor Economics by snwyvern · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In high school, I didn't learn a damn thing from my favorite teachers. If I could have replaced that famous picture of Nguyen getting shot in the face with my Math teacher I would have done so... BUT... I still use inverse operands every chance I get. Go figure.

    3. Re:Labor Economics by bwalling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem with this is that students are generally not in a good position to evaluate their educational needs. Many middle and high school students prefer to not be challenged and to do as little work as possible. A likely outcome of a student rating system is that teachers who offer easy classes that require little work will be seen as the highest quality educators.

      Some of my most difficult teachers in high school are among those that in retrospect I recognize to have done the most for me. Only a few of those would I have evaluated so highly during my schooling.

    4. Re:Labor Economics by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Many schools already have this. The problem is, students are either too lazy to do this, or intentionally give terrible comments about teachers they dont like, regardless of that teacher's teaching ability.

      The "lazy" student is used constantly by bad teachers. There are some teachers who can't teach, pure and simple. In order to boost their self esteem, they call students who simply can't learn the way they teach, lazy. Sure, there are some lazy students who won't do anything. And most teachers that can teach, the students like. The teachers who only have to explain things once because they make it crystal clear, the teachers who will spend a week going over a concept until the students grasp it, those are the teachers that students like. The type that can't teach, give pointless assignments, are strict about parts of grades that don't matter (like failing students because they picked a slightly different typeface other then Times New Roman) usually students hate.

      Ex. A teacher has to constantly discipline a group of 5-7 students who disrupt class. When it comes time to do evaluations, these students all give the teacher terrible reviews. And, since it is done anonymously, there is no way to tell which students gave the evaluations, so there is no way to determine their bias against the teacher. The teacher is then fired because of those bad reviews, simply because some students didnt like the teacher disciplining them.

      But usually teachers have 200 or more kids in a year, so those 5-7 would be quite insignificant.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:Labor Economics by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've found that a good teacher can make students like them. Make students respect them. Who treats them as adults and not 5 year olds. A good teacher adapts course material to the class's demographics, if you have a required history class where most of the class isn't going to be historians, don't hammer in obscure dates of obscure events, doing that isn't learning. Focus on improving the student, not forcing them to memorize useless trivia.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:Labor Economics by joeme1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We do this in University classes. It doesn't work. Most people I see spend 2 minutes filling in the "above average" circle on the scantron card. Even when the teacher is an imbecile. I like your other point though. More educated educators aren't always better. I've had a few "doctors" for teachers that weren't worth the paper their titles were printed on as far as teaching was concerned.

    7. Re:Labor Economics by catchblue22 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Do you not see the conflict of interest in this? Do you really believe that most high school students are capable of differentiating a teacher who cannot explain material from a teacher who simply teaches to a high standard and who won't spoon feed his/her students? There is a difference between a genuinely bad teacher and a teacher who expects his students to learn for themselves. Giving students the power to fire their teachers will lead, in my opinion to a system where teachers are afraid to push their students, where they are afraid to give hard tests, and where they are afraid to not all but give the answers to tests out before giving the tests.

      I have always thought that if students are treated as consumers, and teachers as service providers, then the market will provide what the typical consumer wants: high grades with as little effort as possible. If teachers are to serve their public service role of training competant citizens, then they must have the power to, at times put pressure on their students.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
  4. Two words... by jdb2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...Teacher's unions.

    jdb2

    1. Re:Two words... by moosesocks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but take a look at states without teachers' unions. Well-qualified educators tend to flock far away from these places, due to the low pay and frankly abusive working conditions.

      Although there are a few genuine good souls out there who are willing to make sacrifices for the sake of educating children, we're going to have a tough time recruiting teachers until they're paid fairly and competitively. Unions help accomplish this goal.

      Unionized states do have their own problems. The union tends to protect its own members a bit too strongly (tenure needs to be revised, if not abolished). Similarly, they need to start speaking out against unqualified administrators with absurdly high salaries. The theory of teaching education likely needs to be revised as well, given that the current crop of EdDs don't seem to hold onto their jobs very long.

      One solution could be to loosely regulate the unions. Completely abolishing them has not proven to be a great strategy, as it turns out that abuses are indeed inherent in the system.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  5. Re:News for nerds? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think most nerds have had bad experiences with teachers in public school. Because either teachers count off for the most ridiculous things, have a personal bias against some things (and will fail you if you think otherwise), have a personal vendetta against students who (rightfully) correct them, or many other things that are wrong with our public school system.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  6. It's the bueracracy we hate ... by Xylaan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... but somehow we keep creating.

    The problem is that we don't want to trust people in authority to make decisions, so we come up with a process or committee or something to ensure that one person can't make the hard decisions. But time and time again, it's shown that if no one can make hard decisions, no one will.

    And while it's probably going to beat the hell out of my karma for it, I recommend The Death of Common Sense, by Philip K. Howard. It basically goes into examples of how our unwavering belief that a legal processes can sort through the mess impartially causes all sorts of unexpected results.

    As soon as the authority to make a decision is lost, how can bad behavior be punished?

  7. make em want to leave by Bloater · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Give 'em a broom instead of a class. They'll get the point.

  8. who defines bad? by ifeelswine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    all of the union, lobbying issues notwithstanding, who exactly defines bad and how exactly do you measure results? no child left behind was an attempt at quantifying the teachers task and failed miserably. teachers taught to the test and teachers were considered good if they got more kids to pass the test than their peers. this was at the expense of educating the kids. do you leave it up to the children and parents to define who is good and who is bad? take the math teacher who makes you do math problems like a a drill instructor makes recruits do pushups. is he good or bad? when you're in high school you dread the busy work, as do your parents who are forced to do your homework for you. but when you're a freshman in an engineering program, you may look back and realize that education truly is what's left when you've forgotten everything you learned.

    1. Re:who defines bad? by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's exactly the point. Also, you can't assume that all children and all parents are well-meaning in their complaints. I certainly went to school with some first class jackasses, and often the parents weren't much better. They define a "good" teacher as one that defines little Johnny an "A", even if their miserable child blew off all the work. And it's not unusual for a kid to lie as well. Didn't any of you have the kid in class who would try to get a teacher in trouble?

      Add in the locally-elected school board, and teach a subject like literature or history or science, and it's a recipe for someone with an axe to grind complaining about every little bit in the course content - not how it's taught, or whether the kids are doing well, but rather what is taught. Because they're a nut. It would be great to fire bad teachers, but in a lot of cases, administrators, parents, the kids and the school boards are more likely to get rid of the really good teachers, maybe a few rotten ones, and leave nothing but the barely adequate.

  9. Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    SCENARIO #1: Take one teacher. Put her in a classroom of Japanese-American kids or Hungarian-American kids. They will do well because they are committed to learning.

    SCENARIO #2: Put that same teacher in a classroom of African-American kids from Oakland, California. The kids will do poorly because African-American culture rejects learning -- and rejects Western culture in general.

    In scenario #2, the teacher would be fired as a "bad" teacher. In scenario #1, the same teacher would get a bonus for producing such accomplished students.

    Is there any reasonable and objective way to determine a teacher's performance that is independent of the students in her classroom?

    1. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Jamamala · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a shame you will be modded troll for this due to perceived racism against african-americans, despite raising a very valuable point. Guess that's why you went AC, I don't blame ya.

      No, this is just genuine racism. There's nothing integral about being african-american that makes one reject learning.

      racism, n
      1: the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
      2: discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race

    2. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not a _racial_ issue (i.e. genetics do not really play a role here), that's a _cultural_ issue.

      And Japanese are not economically that much worse off than Americans.

    3. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by regrepsnefpoh · · Score: 3, Informative

      As a current student in the public school system, I believe that this argument is more interesting than insightful. It really is not difficult (for anyone who can remember what it's like to be in school) to tell a lazy teacher from a good one. My lazy teachers are not subtly different. They will literally sit at their computers and play for the majority of the hour. The students know the difference, too. In these sorts of classes, everyone will appear to be working, but you'll notice they're all working on different subjects.

    4. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by paazin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To boil it down to race is to oversimplify; it's a cultural/socioeconomic issue, as present not only in poor African-American communities, but also communities of poor caucasians and others.

      Replace 'African-American' with 'poor' and you've a much clearer metric.

    5. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Throtex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But then the undeniably good teachers are forced to teach to standardized tests. A truly good teacher would know to adapt the lesson to the class dynamic, not the other way around.

      The Virginia "Standards of Learning" exams are precisely the progress-measuring standardized tests you suggest, and as best as I can tell they only serve to hold the brightest kids and the best teachers back to some standardized common denominator.

    6. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, I'm stating that however you want to spin it, the above post was blatantly racist. For every African-American student that "rejects learning," I can find an "underprivileged" white kid that does the same. Hell, even a lot of the privileged ones would rather be partying than learning anything. The "African-American culture rejects learning" argument is pure racist bullshit.

    7. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by readin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is there any reasonable and objective way to determine a teacher's performance that is independent of the students in her classroom?

      Perhaps not, but it may be a matter of matching teachers to students.

      Scenario one: place a teacher with a logical methodical style in a group of students who show up to play games. Scenario two: place that same teacher in group of motivated kids who show up to learn the subject.

      In scenario one, the teacher gets fired. In scenario two, the teacher does quite well leading the kids from step to step and introducing exciting concepts into the classroom while making it fun.

      There were other factors as well, but the above is basically what happened to me when I taught English overseas. There were teachers who were great entertainers who did very well in the first circumstance. That wasn't me. I did very well in a school with a different style, where the focus was on the language and we we're expected to play games (though I did sneak in one or two).

      My getting fired was good for my career and good for the students at both schools.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    8. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Firehed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are of course exceptions to any generalization, but stereotypes and generalizations exist BECAUSE the observed trait is accurate sufficiently often. When you're dealing with statistical sample sizes measured in millions or tens of millions, you can draw some pretty accurate results.

      Yes, correlation is not causation, but that's completely irrelevant to the discussion. If you're drawing conclusions from the results of the ENTIRE standardized testing results from one year and notice that (all other things being equal) one race scores consistently higher than another, it's perfectly valid to use those results in a discussion however unfair those results seem.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    9. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that you then force the teachers to game the system. If the metric s "do X on a standardized test" they'll teach to the test, rather than attempting to maximize learning. ANything not directly related tot he test will be dropped. Facts will be prioritized by their likelihood of being on the test. Important social ideas like group projects (which when done correctly teach cooperation and division of labor) will be dropped because you can't team up on a test. Skills like research will be dropped because you can't research on a test.

      Some things are just hard to measure. Teaching skills are one of them.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    10. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by N3Roaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When my sister was in high school she had two teachers who were chronic alcoholics (not that I don't see how the job could drive one to the drink). Nothing resembling teaching was going on in these classes. When she investigated the student complaint option, she asked about the procedure. This was:

      1) Fill out a form which indicates who you are, who the complaint is against, and what the complaint is. Hand in the form.
      2) Form is taken directly to the teacher the complaint is against.
      3) Teacher fails student listed on the form.

      I can't imagine the procedure for parental complaints was much better.

      --
      Remember RFC 873!
    11. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There isn't just one cause to the problem. Culture plays a role- if a culture values learning (especially if the *parents* value learning) the importance of school will be stressed to the children and they'll try harder.

      Economics have a factor as well- well off people tend to be educated, and thus see value in education. Those who aren't educated tend to be poorer and don't value it for their children either. Without that stress in the home, the children don't put the effort in.

      The thing is- you can fix culture. You can't fix economics- some people will always be worse off, and until we have robots and cheap renewable energy we will always need people for menial jobs. So you have to work on the factor you can, and provide opportunities to people who manage to overcome economics on their own.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    12. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Funny you would say that. I AM a Hungarian-American student. I grew up in Budapest, Hungary and moved to the USA at the age of 18, after finishing high school in Hungary. I am currently in the nursing program at my local community college and what I see in every single class is part frightening, part infuriating.

      Young American college students (I take night classes, so their ages range between 18 and 50 in my class) are awful. They lack the most basic respect, which they display by talking shit about any teachers they don't like as soon as the teacher turns away. Many send and receive text messages on their cellphones all the time despite clear instructions that forbid doing so. Many act like not understanding something is the teacher's fault for not being able to explain things right, at which point they give up entirely and sigh audibly.

      I'm taking basic college level chemistry and, forget kids not being prepared to go to college, the MAJORITY of my chemistry class cannot do FRACTIONS and PERCENTAGES. How do you expect these people to go anywhere near college? These are the kinds of things they were supposed to master by age 10. No wonder they can't do even simple chemistry which involves balanced chemical equations. The entrance test for my program involves basic algebra (the stuff you study in high school by grade 10). A student has to have a combined FIFTY PERCENT math score to pass and be eligible to become a Registered Nurse, yet many fail brutally. They fail using decimal numbers. Fractions. Percentages. These are the same people who will be measuring out your morphine after you get carted into the ER.

      Nursing students in particular are terrible. They don't want to learn how the distribution of ions in an IV bag breaks down, or what it even means, because "it will be on the bag and explained anyway" -- god forbid they ever get into a situation where they don't have everything written down, pre-measured out, chewed, and digested for them. They lack critical thinking or the desire to have any.

      My chemistry teacher sheepishly told me that I'm flying through his class while my fellow students are failing at a 50% rate because I'm used to a more intense method of lecturing back home. I told him he was wrong. He lectures just fine. He's just not used to having decent students in his class.

      Don't even get me started on English or writing essays.

    13. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is teaching apparently the only profession that is not capable of being objectively judged?

      Welcome to the real world.

      SCENARIO #1: Take one SW developer. Put her on a project for a kick ass new feature that will get a lot of attention (but they aren't doing anything particularly difficult.)

      SCENARIO #2: Put that same developer on a team fixing bugs that made it to the field and need quick resolution (a potentially more challenging job.)

      I'd sure as hell rather see a great teacher unfairly fired occasionally (they'll rise to the top elsewhere) than see the person's seniority be the prime consideration. How's seniority based teaching been working out for us?

    14. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by 644bd346996 · · Score: 5, Informative

      And the income disparity isn't caused by any cultural differences? It's pretty obvious that Asian-American families have lower tolerance for gang membership, deadbeat dads, and and most of the other hallmark problems with stereotypical African-American culture. The cultural differences that make the parents more successful (and leads to higher income) are the same ones that lead to the kids getting a better education (which eventually leads to them having higher incomes, too).

      It's far from just a self-perpetuating income disparity where the rich are better educated. Just look at how over-represented people of Asian descent are compared to whites in higher education institutions, and how common entitlement beliefs are among the richer whites. Being rich certainly helps, but the cultural component is significant.

    15. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by edumacator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is there any reasonable and objective way to determine a teacher's performance that is independent of the students in her classroom?

      Yes.

      I'm an English language arts department chair at a very diverse school. As part of my job, I have to observe teachers in all different kinds of classes, AP to freshman remedial classes. It is easy to see which teacher is a good teacher and which isn't. To go with a nice car analogy. If a mechanic is working on a PoS or a Rolls, you can still tell if he knows what he is doing.

      A good teacher cares, asks questions, engages the students with appropriate questions and pushes them to do a little better than they currently are regardless of the class. The bad teacher doesn't.

      Now as to the subjective point. When did objective become synonymous with truth? My evaluations are subjective, with objective elements. Nevertheless, I have the experience to be right subjectively.

    16. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by mustafap · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >When did skinheads take over slashdot?

      Ah come on. It's a few vocal arseholes verses the larger silent majority. Don't forget, many of the people on slashdot are just children too.

      I've lived in a society with skinhead facists. Their idea of blogging would be scratching on a train window, not hanging out on slashdot.

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    17. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you are putting the cart before the horse. How is that we hear so many stories of Asian immigrants coming to this country with nothing, or next to nothing and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, often with less than most native-born people who linger in stagnant poverty over generations. It doesn't take money to climb the socio-economic ladder (although it surely helps a lot), it takes initiative, drive and holding education in value. If you took those well-off Asian-Americans and put them in the same situation as the perpetually poor in the U.S., the majority of them would eventually rise out of that level again.

      It most assuredly is culture that a large factor in the success of some people and the continual failure of others. When everyone around you, including your church leaders and government leaders are telling you that whitey is keeping you down (like, say, our President's pastor for almost half his life), how is it surprising if you believe it and give up on life?

      The biggest factor afflicting the perennially poor, of which blacks comprise and unfortunately large proportion, is the people who exploit them by pounding into their heads that they are now and can only ever be victims: and those people are also too often black themselves and mostly liberals. They are the ones keeping the poor down, by stripping them of their dignity and enslaving them in the chains of lowered expectations, and perpetual dependency. After all, if the persistent underclass were to rise out their problems, who would want to listen to the stupid class-warfare rhetoric that so many of our leaders spew like a KKK Grand Wizard?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    18. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No it's not. You pretty much need to be an Oreo and ignore "black culture" in order to get ahead.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    19. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Eh, there are always exceptions to everything. For instance, I was a poorer, but relatively high-performing student. A lot of the richer kids had a bad, negative attitude about learning (which, to be fair, softened into highschool).

      The truth is however, success in the USA is 20% effort and 80% connections.

      But as to education, a lot of the poorer performing students simply had a very negative attitude in general, and idolized sports players or music artists.

      Culture is a BIG drive behind how one perceives value in education, and I think the targets should be parents and cultural figures, who should be instilling an appreciation of learning and in general "figuring things out". Fostering curiosity is key. It kills me to see rappers or other artists bragging about how successful they are and how easy it is to be so. It is a false image of what life is really like.

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
    20. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact that Hitler did something doesn't automatically make that thing factually incorrect. Hitler has no effect on whether or not different races have different intelligence levels (from what I've read they don't, but I'm not a biologist).

      You have to separate your emotion from the facts. It's intellectually dishonest to try to discredit something simply because a disliked individual/group/whatever was in favor of it. If there is no difference between the races, fine; use facts to support that. You do not need to invoke Hitler unless your goal is not to spread the truth, but instead propaganda.

    21. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by BeanThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is there any reasonable and objective way to determine a teacher's performance that is independent of the students in her classroom?

      Like it or not, by far the best thing we have available for evaluating the quality of a teacher, is another human being's judgment. I realise it's not perfect, but it only makes sense to choose the "best available" in the absence of a perfect system. Generally the existing checks and balances would prevent most cases of outright abuse.

      Humans are actually generally awesome at tasks like being able to just watch a teacher for a while and say, "wow, this one is fantastic" or "hey, that one sucks piles" ... *no* known machine or "objective method" can even come remotely close. So frankly, I don't know how we got led so badly astray that we no longer follow such a simple, logical, obvious method. PC-ness run amok, maybe.

    22. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by cvd6262 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a teacher educator, but my background isn't in public school teaching; it's in psychometrics and quantitative psychological research. Because of this, I find my views are vastly different from the faculty around me.

      When I see the discrepancy between poor-inner-city-[minority] and well-to-do-suburban-[majority], my science sense starts tingling, and I think, "I wonder if it's because of X, Y, or Z... or maybe something else. What data could I gather to establish or refute some of these connections."

      In other words, I tend to think like you do.

      My colleagues just scream, "Oppression!" They conduct qualitative "critical analyses," which means they gather data to back up their apriorisms (because "everyone's biased; we're just acknowledging ours and leveraging it"). In the end, the conclusion they formulated before even gathering the data is supported and the view that it is race, not socioeconomic status, becomes accepted as social science "law."

      One of my graduate students showed me an article this week which compared the achievement between poor whites and poor blacks on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (which is a popular whipping boy of the anti-standardized test movement). Long story short: There was a whopping 3-point difference between the two groups, and both were 20 points below the national mean. (The PPVT uses an IQ-equivalent scale, so 100 is the mean, with a standard deviation of 15.)

      But the researchers concluded that "the sample (N > 200) was too small to generate any meaningful conclusions." I wonder if they would have included the same caveat had they discovered a significant difference.

      --

      I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.

    23. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I hate to break this to you, but community college in the US is basically "High School, Take 2." If you want to judge American students, that's fine-- in fact I bet most of your observations are still correct-- but please do so at a REAL university.

    24. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The assumption that there is one monolithic "black" culture is pure racist bullshit. All of the blacks I know actually value education very highly; but then most of them are actually African immigrants (nothing like coming from a country with free public education to make you appreciate education.) However, I do believe some Black and Latino students are given grief by their peers for "acting white" if they study hard and excel at academics. I know an African immigrant who is an officer in the US Navy. He said he was given the most grief not by the whites he served with, but by Black subordinates who complained that he didn't talk like them or dress like them!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    25. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In any setting, one must assimilate oneself into the dominant culture in order to be successful. Yes, there is a dominant culture in the US. But I think it is racist to assume that the dominant culture is an entirely white culture, and that all whites are raised as part of that culture, while all blacks are not. I come from a long line of rednecks, and I have had to work hard to assimilate myself into the dominant culture, just as most minorities and immigrants must.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    26. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Simple enough. It's not a race problem it's a culture problem. Look at the current set of black culture icons and you'll have an idea as to why. That, and if you try to learn, you get called an Oreo apparently. Bill Cosby and a few others have been ranting about this for a while, but things don't really seem to be changing very quickly.

    27. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by David+Jao · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you are putting the cart before the horse. How is that we hear so many stories of Asian immigrants coming to this country with nothing, or next to nothing and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, often with less than most native-born people who linger in stagnant poverty over generations. If you took those well-off Asian-Americans and put them in the same situation as the perpetually poor in the U.S., the majority of them would eventually rise out of that level again.

      You're missing something very obvious here. US immigration law is tortuous and acts as a giant filter selecting for only the most desirable immigrants. In order to even make it to the US from Asia, you need to be abnormally hard-working, resourceful, and industrious.

      The astounding success of Asian immigrants in the US has nothing to do with Asian culture. It is entirely due to the fact that Asian immigrants in the US form a highly biased selection relative to the population of all Asians, consisting only of those people who are smart and persistent enough to make it through the immigration gauntlet. In other words, you only see the bright ones in America, because the others aren't even allowed to immigrate here.

      In contrast, the majority of African Americans are descended from slaves (sad, but true), and most (80-85%) of the Hispanic population stems from illegal immigration (source). This explains why the selection effect of immigration law is only really visible in Asians.

    28. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by jmv · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not sure whether that qualifies as a "real university", but I studied one semester (exchange program) at University of Connecticut. When I arrived there, I remember some people talking to me like I was lucky to get some *real* education for a semester (unlike what I had in my poor country, Canada). Turns out that the level of the classes I got there was so much lower than that of my University (U. of Sherbrooke) that I had to study by myself a before returning for my next semester. It was also the first time I felt I had an impact on the group's average just by myself!

    29. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by cvd6262 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, I know this. I edited that post a couple of times for concision. But, since you brought it up, let me explain.

      Given that the distribution of the normative sample is known, one could quite easily estimate the necessary sample size for a given difference to be considered significant. This should be done *before* the research took place. The fact that these researchers stated that their no-difference findings may be due to a small sample (which was equal to about 10% of the size of the entire norming sample) hints that they *thought* there would be a bigger difference.

      It may actually be quite clever: If you expect a big difference, sample narrowly so that only your expected difference would be significant, while still plausibly dismissing non-significant differences as the result of a small sample.

      Also, while you are correct that the specific caveat of sample size wouldn't be applicable if they found a significant difference, there are other important limitations (e.g. external validity) that would have to be discussed. The research I have seen on the topic tends not to bring up those or anything else that could lessen the impact of their conclusions, but only when they find a difference.

      Thanks for keeping me honest on it.

      --

      I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.

    30. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can blame the individual, but you should also blame their circumstances.

      Absolutely, and yet the circumstances you speak of, which are extremely significant, are also hugely influenced by the very things created to help remediate them. The Welfare State has been a huge factor in the skyrocketing rates of out-of-wedlock births, and especially of children being raised by single mothers, which is a guarantee of significant disadvantages throughout life and a demonstrated factor leading to increased delinquency, drug-abuse, violence, and many other effects that rob these poor folks of their chance to become self-sufficient.

      The very proponents who throw ever more increasing amounts of money into a broken education system while simultaneously cementing the self-serving power of the teacher unions who are a very effective roadblock to proper reform, resulting in schools in many cities that are on the level with those in the poorest third-world countries, all the while refusing to budge an inch on issues like vouchers, which are perhaps the only way possible to give many poor people a decent education, do nothing but perpetuate the cycle of despair and dependency.

      Politicians who constantly invoke class-warfare rhetoric do nothing but perpetuate envy and resentment at a system that can provide the means for economic freedom to almost everyone subvert the very people they are seeking to represent by casting them as helpless victims rather than working to offer true alternatives, and encouragement to try to join the system rather than mindlessly protest it.

      How does it help anyone when all these people hear is how they need the government to GIVE them everything, rather than needing the government to HELP them get things themselves? When our sitting President flat-out says his goal is to "redistribute the wealth", how does that encourage anyone to want to do anything more than sit around and wait for a handout? When the Reverend White, and his ilk, who strike me as being much closer in ideology to radical Muslims than any Christian I've ever known, literally preaches hatred for this country and the majority of its citizens, how can he expect to reap anything but anger and perhaps even violence, instead of real reform and real good?

      So yes, I do blame the circumstances, but more importantly, I blame the people who have ensured that these circumstances, both economic and psychological, remain bad, and will never get better.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    31. Re:Difficult to Define a "Good" Teacher by Deosyne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      LOL. I did my first couple of years at a community college. Many of my instructors actually worked during the day in the fields that they taught and brought incredibly valuable insights and experience. The students were older on average and often worked for a living, so there wasn't a lot of grab-assing and many of us were genuinely engaged.

      Then I went to a university for a couple of years. Droves of kids with a sense of entitlement that rivaled the Egyptian monarchs. Massive auditoriums where people would never shut the fuck up until you put some fear into them, when they bothered to show up. Teachers who have been stuck in the ivory tower for most of their lives.

      Yeah, some of my upper level courses were fantastic as the class sizes were small and the students were truly interested in the material, but my overall community college experience was overwhelmingly superior to my university experience. About the only thing that the university had over the community college was a better-than-thou attitude.

  10. two reasons. by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    first is tenure.

    second reason is unions.

    Broward County schools are filled with bad teachers. The unions keep them working.

    recently a broward teacher had a delusional episode in the classroom. she had a pair of scissors and was threatening a student shouting about demons.

    the union not only kept her job, but she's coming back to the classroom (albeit at a different school).

    Bad teachers are a bit like molesting priests. They get moved around schools when people complain about them.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:two reasons. by a+whoabot · · Score: 4, Informative

      [citation needed]

      You shouldn't ask for a citation unless it's actually hard to find. I'm making the radical assumption that you have access to Google. This was the fifth result when searching Google for all of: broward county teacher scissors. Note that what the report adds is that the teacher had no previous issues and that her freakout was reportedly a result of an adverse reaction to medication.

    2. Re:two reasons. by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow, are you cherry picking your data.

      1) Tenure is good as long as it is appropriately given out. As in, not like candy. Though, arguably it isn't appropriate for high school teachers.

      2) That psychotic (no not delusional, you clearly don't know what you're talking about) episode was the result of mental illness (or rarely another medical condition). Though you (among others) might not be comfortable with someone who is mentally ill teaching kids, as long as it is treated (yes, this can and most of the time is successfully treated) there really isn't any problem. And I can tell you now that you wouldn't even have the faintest clue about whether that is going on when the illness is properly treated.

      3) She was able to keep her job, not because of the union, but because of labour law. There are many a law to protect the ill and that includes mental illness. The only problem would be if this teacher refused treatment, then there would be a safety issue. That would allow the school to take further action.

      4) She would have changed schools not because of the outburst, but because of its social repercussions. As in, it would be *very* difficult, if not impossible, to control those kids after something like that happened. Never mind similar things beyond that classroom.

      5) In case you haven't gotten the theme here, there is a difference between a bad teacher and someone who is ill. There is a difference. You should get to know it.

    3. Re:two reasons. by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wonder if the Dr. was fired for making a poor medical decision that had a life threatening consequence.

      No wait, I don't really.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    4. Re:two reasons. by DragonTHC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thanks to story645. I couldn't find the link.

      http://www.justnews.com/news/19263827/detail.html#-

      The teacher said "I don't care if I get fired."

      She was combative, threatening children with scissors, and clearly not fit to teach.

      Oh, and the class was a special education class.

      The only safe thing to do, is not allow someone in the classroom that can possible have that reaction, regardless of medication.

      There already was a safety issue. She threatened students with scissors. She ransacked her own classroom.

      This was a case where, clearly, she wasn't fit for the classroom. (there are no labor laws that protect people who put children in danger where they work).

      That's like saying that a pedophile can be a teacher because he's in treatment for his mental illness. No Fucking Way.

      And no fucking way this lady should be anywhere near kids. The simple fact that she's on medication which can result in an episode like this disqualifies her for teaching in my book.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
  11. Tenure is the key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article summary is incomplete. The title of the article is "Firing tenured teachers can be a costly and tortuous task"
              Well, the problem, and the solution, are right there.

              Tenure is intended for university professors mainly; it intentionally makes it harder to fire a tenured person, so they can "push the boundaries" a bit in their classes.. without the fear of being fired for petty political reasons.

              The universities do not just give out tenure to every new professor, they make sure they are competent first. If the California schools have *tenured* teachers that can't teach, that is the problem RIGHT THERE. Don't give tenure to a teacher until they know they can teach. Simple as that.

    1. Re:Tenure is the key by TerribleNews · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Tenure is intended for university professors mainly; it intentionally makes it harder to fire a tenured person, so they can "push the boundaries" a bit in their classes.. without the fear of being fired for petty political reasons.

      Tenure is for research, not for teaching*. Elementary school teachers are not there to push the boundaries of cutting edge research. If a grade 8 teacher is doing something politically unpopular, well, I'm not really sure what is wrong with that situation (even odds on overprotective parents and teachers like that guy who told the kid he wasn't even capable of killing himself), but I suspect it's not inflammatory conclusions in published research.

      * This is not to say that I think that university professors shouldn't be good teachers, only that the academic world prescribes the "publish or perish" model, not the "teach undergrads well or perish" model.

  12. This is only one side of the story. by slasho81 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Part of the problem is unions. Another part is the massive bureaucracy. But many times, it's to protect the good teachers from vindictive parents.

  13. Re:News for nerds? by Daimanta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I think most nerds have had bad experiences with teachers in public school. Because either teachers count off for the most ridiculous things, have a personal bias against some things (and will fail you if you think otherwise), have a personal vendetta against students who (rightfully) correct them, or many other things that are wrong with our public school system."

    Well, this isn't surprising. As someone who has been in high-school and also someone who grew up in a family of teachers I can safely say that this is inevitable. Nice teachers will simply be bullied untill they give in. High-school kids are highly observant of the level of authority a teacher has and once they see a weakness they can be quite merciless.

    The people who are left are either split between people who have some natural authority and dickheads(the kind you read about in this article). A lot of teachers see students correcting them as an assault on their authority and they are partly right about this. Yes, the student may be right but admitting this may weaken the position the teacher has or aspires to have and thereby he has to carefully maneuvre between admitting his faults and maitaining order in the classroom(and over the students in general).

    Remember that a high-school student spends around 5 years in a high-school but a teacher needs to maintain his position many times longer and that can cause the teacher to become ridgid. Personally, I see this as in inevitability though through good planning the damage can be minimized.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  14. Because 'bad' is subjective. by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wanna fire that "bad" teacher for teaching evolution? Great, make it easier to do so. I agree there are bad teachers, but the fact that you don't like them doesn't necessarily mean they are indeed bad teachers.

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  15. Same as any other profession by mkcmkc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've worked as a computer programmer for over 20 years, and I have never seen or heard of any programmer being fired for incompetence, no matter the magnitude.

    As far as I'm concerned, teachers deserve our support, and I think all of the bitching is just a smokescreen to support cutting education funding, and a mind-trick to turn people against unions.

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
  16. Re:Simple answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nonsense, we have complained about our son's teacher many times. She gives them incorrect information and punishes them for what the previous class did. Many of the parents in the community have complained and even petitioned the local school board to fire her, however she is repeatedly found to be not at fault and her job is kept. California is suffering huge losses of teachers due to budget problems this year, and out of all the ones who were fired, the one or two bad apples aren't in the list.

    It seems that just being a bad teacher isn't enough to have your teaching job pulled in California. All you need is some seniority and a union to back you up and you're not going anywhere... ever.

  17. Re:News for nerds? by speedtux · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's no accident: that entry level teacher is still motivated and idealistic, and he's willing to spend a lot of extra time. Give him a few years of teaching, and he'll lose all that.

  18. Re:It's Simple by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've had maybe 5 good teachers, out of say the 7 new teachers I get each semester for the last 10 or so years. ~5/700.

    Apparently, none of those 5 were mathematics teachers, I'm guessing.

    The whole class constantly complains about her to the principle, but nothing is ever done.

    Nor were they English teachers, it'd seem ...

  19. Re:News for nerds? by SnapShot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This would also be alleviated if there was a license required before people could become parents.

    For all the back-and-forth that's going to take place in this article, the fundamental truth is that shitty parents generally lead to shitty students.

    --
    Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
  20. Obvious--Teachers' Unions by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its easy. Teachers' Unions have no incentive to do anything but gain as much money and power for the teachers as possible. They are not there for the students. Students don't vote or pay dues to the union.

    Unfortunately, boards of education have been fairly powerless. There is this myth of the "Virtuous Teacher" who is perfect in all ways, makes minimum wage, and would solve all the worlds problems if only they had a little more resources. This is reinforced by the media, both in moves and TV as well as reporters. The truth is that teachers are regular people, there are good and bad ones. But if you try to stand up to the union, you are demonized as an "evil teacher hater". Nevermind the fact that test scores haven't gone up despite hundreds of billions of dollars in spending increases. Or the fact that we spend over $12,000 PER STUDENT in Atlanta and D.C., two of the lowest performing school districts in the country!

    I have alot of respect for teachers. In fact, I have often thought about going into teaching High School after I retire as a way of giving back. I would not have made it to where I am without the exceptional work of many caring teachers. But I also had to put up with more than a few worthless, incompetent teachers who didn't care one bit about actually teaching. They came in with no preparation, read straight out of the book, and gave completely worthless exams. It was absolute torture having to sit there for 60-90 minutes a day, every day, with someone getting paid to waste my time. Back in High School myself and many others wondered how they could keep their jobs. Now I know.

    Hopefully the tide is turning. If a paper like the LA Times is criticizing the union there maybe hope yet. We now need some boards to stand up to the unions.

  21. Re:Simple answer by mjb · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because the teachers union is WAY too powerful!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw

    --
    There are 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
  22. Is this just USA? by Crookdotter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why is it that I get the impression that teaching in the USA is pretty much awful? It seems like teachers are pretty much universally demonised and hated, come across as petty dictators of their classrooms.

    As a teacher myself of 11 years (UK, Science) I can say that this is not the situation here. Sure, some teachers are disliked more than others - it goes with the job - but by and large (and I mean 95%) we work well with our students and they work well with us. We enjoy each others interaction in the classroom and around school, have a laugh and learn some interesting stuff.

    We don't go around picking on kids and watching youtube instead of teaching. What kind of pride in your job would that give?

    I don't have any experience of the US high school system but it seems to have fallen apart for the majority of kids. Is this, sadly, the case? Or have teachers been singled out as a scapegoat for the failings of US society? I genuinely can't believe that American teachers are so universally awful.

    1. Re:Is this just USA? by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      """
      I don't have any experience of the US high school system but it seems to have fallen apart for the majority of kids. Is this, sadly, the case?
      """

      Essentially, yes.

      """
      Or have teachers been singled out as a scapegoat for the failings of US society?
      """

      Essentially, yes.

      The 'no child left behind' thing is a tragedy. Seriously, look into it. It's nothing but obscene. But, what also happens is that students don't study or pay attention in class and of course fail or get poor grades. Then the teacher gets blamed. Which isn't exactly fair as the teacher can't exactly force someone to learn if they don't want to.

      So, the effect this has is that everyone starts looking out for themselves and gets very defensive. There's no giving or taking of criticism, even if constructive, because, it all could lead to getting blamed for something that isn't the teachers fault. And so on.

      Essentially, the entire situation is a gigantic cluster-fuck. One in which, at this point, isn't able to be untangled because every party involved in pointing there fingers at everyone else, completely unable to admit even the most innocent failings on there part regardless of how much proof there is that it happens.

  23. Media using teachers as punching bags again by damburger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article kicks off describing how a group of shrill, ignorant parents took the word of an emotionally disturbed 12 year old and decided to push for someone to be fired based soley on that.

    Parents like to treat teachers as their personal governesses. Like that cheerleading coach who was crucified for playboy pictures that were not a big deal until some fat dumpy girl who didn't get picked had a tantrum and made her mum charge into the headteachers office with the pictures.

    Your kid isn't special. In all likelihood, your kid is a spoilt, willfully ignorant little shit who will give the teacher hell no matter how much they try (and they do try; nobody sticks at teaching who doesn't see it as a vocation as well as a job). Your little darling is so convinced they will be a millionaire professional sportsperson/musician/actor because you've always told them how 'special' they were, that they carry this overinflated sense of entitlement into the classroom along with 30 other 'special' kids.

    The result basically lord of the flies with nicer clothes. And the people who take up the under paid task of controlling the little bastards are constantly subject to demands to fire them, cut their pay, and increase their work loads.

    Back off assholes.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:Media using teachers as punching bags again by swillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Back off assholes.

      Give me a voucher for half the value of what the public school spends on each of my kids, which I can take to the private school of my choice, and you'll never hear from me again.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  24. Easy to fire anyone in the USA by Simonetta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just put a few drops of hashish oil into their coffee each day. The amount is so small that they won't feel stoned, and it will accumulate in their bodies.

    Then after a week or so, call them in for a 'random' urine test. The test will show (horror upon horror!) molecular traces of THC in their urine and you will have NO PROBLEM firing them, denying them unemployment, getting them thrown out of public housing, getting any professional license revoked, and just generally screwing up their All-American lifestyle forever.

    Works every time. Done in the USA to hundreds of people daily for twenty years now.

    Seriously, it's how we got rid of the asshole gung-ho Neidermeier officers back in the 1980's when I was in the US Navy. One positive test and they were gone: no appeal, no second-test review, no $2000 gas-spectraography review confirmation, no nothing. A few drops a day and the assholes disappear. Took the JAG years to realize that we were doing this, but we were out of 'service' by then.

    It's like judo. You use your opponent's fanaticism against them.

    But time has passed and wounds have healed. If you were booted out of the military for failing a drug test and you are the kind of person who never did or never would get high, then it probably happened to you. Think back about who you were seriously pissing off at the time. It was probably one of us.

    We're not sorry. The military is better place because we did it. There was no permanent, endless war at the time and this was the easiest way to get rid of the psychos who would have gotten us all killed when the PEW finally arrived after 9/11.

    1. Re:Easy to fire anyone in the USA by ctmurray · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I love about /. People publicly admitting to illegal behavior and encouraging others to copy their behavior. I am sure the officers let go from the military with dishonorable discharges would agree no harm was done, their lives went on fine as if you had not done anything. ;-)

  25. Arrrr by OpenSourced · · Score: 3, Funny

    They are usually fat and get stuck in the cannon mouth

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  26. Re:Simple answer by edumacator · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm actually a high school department chair, so I know a little about this issue. The problem is not finding good teachers. There are actually a lot of good applicants whenever an opening occurs in my department. The problem is the difficulty in getting rid of bad teachers. The process even where I live, a state without unions, is tremendously difficult. It can be done, but it isn't easy.

    Personally, I believe this issue is the primary one impacting our students' success. If we could fire bad teachers, we could get rid of the concept of merit pay, incentives and all the other band-aid-on-a-broken-arm solutions.

  27. How Do I Fire an Incompetent Teacher? (Flowchart) by moniker · · Score: 5, Interesting
  28. Re:Authority shouldn't come before truth by Daimanta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "In my personal opinion the minute a teacher decides: "Correcting false information is less important than maintaining my own aura of authority," they stop being an educator and start down the road to becoming a tyrant in a teapot. "

    And the minute they lose their autority is the minute their job becomes hell. Admitting that you're wrong is important but being in charge of the classroom should most certainly not be ignored as an important factor in doing your properly.

    Only the very best can do both so you need to sacrifice some of your wishes to keep the system running. Sad but true.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  29. Two words - you already know what they are. by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tenure and Unions

    I work in a private school as an IT director, and we don't have either of those things. If you are a stellar teacher, are rewarded with more compensation, and better kit for your classroom.

    If you are a, "do-just-enough-to-get-by", type of teacher, you don't get more/better stuff for your classroom (motivated teachers will make better use of the materials), and if you are bad enough, your contract won't be renewed next year.

    I've been with this school about 8 years, and I can see the steady improvement in the staff. The strong ones stay, the weak ones go elsewhere.

    We are a private school - typically districts send us students, and we have some private pay students. We need to have the best staff possible, or else districts and parents will send their kids somewhere else. Competition does make us better.

    That's the way public schools need to be.

    -ted

    1. Re:Two words - you already know what they are. by blackchiney · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't work for any school but I did attended a private school (briefly) and you know what? It was also a good school and the teachers had a union. So your corollary to unions and teachers doesn't add up.

      How about this, find a public school without a union and see where it sits on the performance curve. Because you base your data on a private school doesn't amount to anything. Private schools have the benefit of screening out unfit students and parents. This is something public schools don't have an option of. And there is way more evidence stating a disruptive student can destroy class cohesion than there is on the performance of teachers.

      When talking to a friend of mine that left teaching after three years, it wasn't the union, the district, or even the students that made him leave. It was the fact that over the years he was asked to do more than teach. For 125 students he has to be psychologist, parent, and bureaucrat. He had to prepare them for standardize tests, evaluate their emotional well-being, and prepare class material.

      In my opinion, anyone that can be a teacher in this day and age I say {$Diety} bless 'em

    2. Re:Two words - you already know what they are. by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only problem with competitive schools is that for competition to work, you need to have schools that lose. And that means that the students lose. The entire point of public schools is to allow kids who can't afford to compete for education to get an education that will at least get them through life.

      I support private schools, but not at the expense of public schools. We need to always have that support network for everyone in our society.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  30. Unions don't always oppose this by dlenmn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The teachers' union in Toledo, Ohio, has spearheaded a controversial policy to purge the school district of incompetent teachers. It's called "peer review" and no school system in the country has been doing it longer than Toledo.

    ...

    union members today overwhelmingly support it.

    ...

    The AFT endorsed peer review in 1984.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91327130 Listen to the story -- the text is a poor summary.

  31. This doesn't happen just in california by webdragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A few years ago I pulled my son from a class with such a teacher, She had hit him on the head on more than one occasion, once even on film. it took not only suing the school but also giving the video and doing a interview with the local news before they fired her. Sadly after the summer break was over she returned to her teaching job until every one of her students parents showed up, signed a petition and personally escorted her and the principal *who turned out to be her boyfriend off school grounds before the school board made her being fired stick.

    1. Re:This doesn't happen just in california by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      She had hit him on the head on more than one occasion, once even on film. it took not only suing the school but also giving the video and doing a interview with the local news before they fired her.

      Firing was the wrong path - call the cops, have her arrested.

  32. Re:News for nerds? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not to mention the simple fact that most schools, especially pre HS, simply aren't built for dealing with the smart kids. The entire design and curricula is built for the C kid that will follow their little steps and do everything their way. After being tutored for 2 years due to a bad motorcycle accident they tried to reintegrate me into junior high. After about 2 months they just sent me back home and sent my tutor back out. Why? Because I was constantly being accused of being a "cheater" or a troublemaker because I didn't think that way.

    It ended when my tutor walked past the vice principal and overheard them getting ready to expel me. I of course was extremely pissed off at being treated like dirt and told them to please do. When she asked "Why on earth are you thinking about throwing out one of our brightest kids?" the math teacher spoke up "He is cheating in my class and can't even bother to show his work! And look at how he dresses, he is obviously a gang element!" after Ms. Edwards got done choking on laughter she said "He wears those military fatigues year round because they belonged to his late grandfather which he loved dearly. And as for cheating that is easy to disprove" so she walked over to the blackboard and wrote two complex math problems. She then had me had her my Casio cal watch with space invaders built in(remember those?) and told the math teacher "If he is cheating this will show us. You work the one on the left, he'll work the right" and of course I was done in 1/3 of the time and with no work shown.

    After the math teacher AGAIN screamed "he must be cheating!" the vice principal rolled his eyes and after using my calc watch to see the answer was correct he asked "So how DO you do it?" and I honestly told him "I don't know, I just know it is right". Ms Edwards just smiled and said "His mother had him reading books by Asimov and Heinlein at around age ten. While the other kids are playing Atari he is writing computer programs. His brain simply works differently than ours. While you and I have to work the steps, somewhere in his brain is a little voice that just lets him 'know' the answer. If you try to fit him into the traditional mold and work the steps he is only going to get frustrated as his brain simply doesn't work like that" but after having teachers call me a cheater and saying I was a disruptive influence because I would be in the back reading Asimov because I had done the entire weeks work the first day out of sheer boredom, they simply gave up and sent me Ms Edwards.

    The point is a lot of the low scoring kids I knew that were labeled troublemakers and goof offs were simply frustrated or bored to tears because their brains didn't work that way. Both of my boys are being home schooled now because they ended up with the same shit I went through. The oldest at 16 is reading medical books that frankly make even MY head hurt while at the same time teaching himself 3d computer animation, while the youngest is teaching himself 2d cell style animation on his computer. With both if you sit down and actually explain to them a concept they get it quite quickly and will be hitting you with insightful questions at a rapid pace. But putting them in front of a blackboard and spewing the crap to them simply doesn't work. Their brains simply don't work that way. So while I am sure there are plenty of shitty teachers(like my "He's cheating" because I was better than him math teacher) I wonder how much of it is because that cookie cutter straight c designed curriculum frankly sucks if you have even a little brains and creative problem solving. And sorry about the length, but some things just don't fit into a soundbyte, at least not one written by me. I'm afraid my brain just doesn't work that way ;-)

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  33. Those darn unions and they didn't anything for me by bigbigbison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I taught high school and the only thing the Teacher's Union did for me was make my paycheck smaller by taking money out of it.

    If there is some teacher's union out there with all these magical powers that people always claim they have it obviously wasn't the one that I was part of...

    --
    http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
  34. Re:News for nerds? by Daimanta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Note: I do not live in the US.

    In the Netherlands, where I live, we have a seperated the high-school classes based on your learning capacity. If you are smart, you will be able to visit the higher high-school classes, if you aren't you will go to the lower classes. We now have 4 distinct levels(more or less), and the highest level is split in two where people in the higher class of the two get taught greek and/or latin.

    The ability to maintain control is different for the different levels of students and it is widely known and accepted that people in level 1 are much harder to control than people in level 4 although you will always have problems with teaching in every level if you can't keep order.

    Thankfully, people in level 4(where I have studied) mostly take their work seriously and I learned in a mostly healthy environment partially because of that.
    I have dozens of examples of teachers who had limited to no authority and without exceptions the learning process was disturbed by that. Effects ranged from taking the teacher not seriously in class to outright insulting them in public and actively trying to get them to leave by means of causing distress.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  35. The Freshwater case is a prominent example of this by JoshuaZ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are few examples of this which have gotten prominent media attention. One ongoing example is that of John Freshwater, an 8th grade school teacher who was found to be a) teaching creationism to his students and b) using a Tesla coil to burn crosses onto students arms. These were among other problems. The district finally got sick of it all and tried to get him fired. The result is a series of lawsuits which are still ongoing. This is getting regular coverage over that The Pandas Thumb http://pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?blog_id=2&tag=Freshwater&limit=20 due mainly to the fact that Freshwater was promoting Young Earth Creationism. So in this case we have a teacher who was engaged in unconstitutional behavior and also engaging in what might constitute assault and the district still can't rid of him without a massive hassle.

  36. Why is it so hard to fire bad parents? by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because bad parents affect kids more than the teachers, and there are a /lot/ more bad parents out there.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
  37. There is a charter school in Oakland with minority by George_Ou · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is a charter school in Oakland with nearly all minority kids (mostly black) that do better than schools comprised mostly of while kids in wealthier districts. The same can be said of Catholic schools comprised of mostly inner city black kids. My point is that race really isn't the issue although there is a serious problem within popular black culture. But if the school has zero tolerance for disruptive children and they enforce a strict learning environment, you can teach children of any race to do well.

  38. In my educational experience... by dark_requiem · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have had a biology teacher who was a proud member of the Promise Keepers (our section on evolution was ten minutes, mostly consisting of "Now, you don't have to believe any of this."), a college algebra teacher who had trouble adding two single-digit numbers without a calculator and who let us use cheat sheets for every exam, including the final (could only be 1"x1", but in 6pt font, that's every formula for the test), a statistics and probability teacher who spent most of the class discussing the latest goings on with the various school athletic organizations (she was the cross-country coach), an AP English teacher who had a penchant for "losing" papers she didn't want to grade (and when she did grade papers, the first few submissions would have corrections and comments, the rest had nothing but a grade, rumor has it she never read them, just assigned a grade based on what she thought that student would do), a physics teacher so mind-bogglingly incompetent that my sophomore year a student organization devoted to her termination had more members than any other club (she was really, really bad, a powerpoint teacher), a German teacher who spent more time showing us slides of her various trips to Germany than teaching (we did a lot of projects in English in that class), a Spanish teach who spent an entire semester not teaching Spanish because it was more important that we learn about the cultures of South American nations (Spanish-speaking or otherwise), a seventh-grade math teacher who didn't mark off points for wrong answers because, and I quote, "Check marks lower self-esteem" (no, I am not making that up). The list goes on and on. We watched the Leo DiCaprio Romeo and Juliet, rather than reading it, I had an English teacher in middle school who thought Billy Maddison was an educational film, you name it. I attended a private Catholic school until fifth grade, and while I wouldn't have wanted to study Biology there, I was about two years' worth of curriculum ahead of my classmates when I transferred into public school.

    Now, I did have a handful of good teachers. Namely, two good middle school science teachers, my sociology teacher, 20th Century History teacher, CAD teacher, art teacher (I made a bong mug), and good elementary teachers (until public school. Although they were about as friendly as Catholic school nuns are widely supposed to be). That's it. And, those teachers were the ones always getting into it with the administration. The most wildly incompetent teachers were the ones in the administration's best graces. My sociology teacher couldn't get textbooks for his class, for example.

    A large part of the problem is the incompetent teachers. They have no interest in emphasizing retention. Starting College Algebra, but don't remember how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide fractions? No problem, the first month of the class will be spent reviewing it! It is very much the case that the further you progress through the curriculum, the less you are expected to remember. Instead of booting the kids who can't handle fractions out of the College Algebra course and sending them back to a more appropriate course, the curriculum is dumbed-down to fit them (I once had to make up a test in College Algebra, along with a classmate a year ahead of me who was about to graduate valedictorian. We were sitting out in the hall, and I was breezing through the test, while my classmate looked quite perplexed, stuck on the first problem. Finally, she turned to me and asked "What does perimeter mean?" God I hate this country...). As a result, your average and above-average students not only don't learn the material they should, but they often lose confidence and interest in school in particular, and learning in general (luckily I still enjoy learning, I just chose to learn out of the state-sponsored daycare/prison).

  39. Re:Simple answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are one, and only one, of the following:

    1)Intimately familiar with the details of the GP's situation and with the people involved in it.

    2)Talking out of your ass.

  40. Re:Simple answer by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, in pretty much any other field it's rediculously easy to fire someone for cause.

    So that brings up the pretty obvious question of "what's so special about teaching"?

    Is is a generic sort of "you can't fire a government worker" problem, or is it somethings specific to teaching?

    What besides a Union is going make it not trivial to fire someone for incompetence?

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  41. Re:Simple answer by edumacator · · Score: 4, Informative

    It differs from system to system, but the main issues are failing to teach well. For us, there are three areas a teacher needs to have proficiency, content development, promoting engagement, and classroom management. The teacher has to be able to develop a lesson that is appropriate for the grade level, cognitive ability for the students in that classroom, and that covers the standards being taught. Most teachers can do this well.

    Promoting engagement is where a lot of problems arise. Can a teacher make a lesson engaging? Do they ask relevant questions that probe a student's understanding or that prompt a student to look further for a more robust understanding? Does the teacher work with all the students in the room in ways that at least attempt to get a student involved.

    Finally, teachers have to manage the classroom well. Do they spend forty minutes taking roll and asking about the students' plans for the weekend, or do they get right to the lesson? How do they deal with students who are acting appropriately, or inappropriately? Do they control the situation or let the student? Etc.

    If a teacher isn't proficient in many of these areas or is egregiously negligent in one of them, you can begin the process to terminate employment.

    Of course there are several steps involved.

    • Conference with the teacher, giving details about what the shortcomings are.
    • Observe the teacher again, if the problems are fixed, the teacher is ok.
    • If the problems are still there, you have to conference again and give the teacher a remediation plan. They often have to observe other teachers and work with other teachers on how they are running their classroom.
    • If there are still issues, depending on the severity, you can begin termination proceedings.
    • If the system agrees with your position, they terminate the contract, but then the teacher can appeal. For us, the system often wins.

    Of course, the article is correct that it is much easier to fire someone who is negligent. Proving a teacher is bad in the classroom isn't easy.

  42. Re:Simple answer by edumacator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I were to ask you if an apple is past its ripest point, you would have difficulty telling if the apple I gave you was just a day past its prime. If the apple was rotten, you would just know.

    The notion that you can't quantify bad teaching is somewhat of a red herring for this issue. We aren't talking about the two average teachers down the hall, we're talking about someone who is clearly bad. When I was in high school, I had a Physics teacher who didn't notice when two fellow students drew a six foot tall penis on the back wall. He spoke in half sentences, and couldn't remember how physics worked. He should have been fired. When you get into the middle of the road teachers, firing them is a whole other issue.

  43. Unions think teachers should not be accountable by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I complained about my daughter's teacher, and the Beaverton Education Association sent me a cease and desist order threatening to sue me for defamation and interfering with the teacher's business relationships! Wanna know what teacher's priorities are? Visit the teacher's union web sites sometime. Hint: They contain no content about helping students learn; all everything there is concerned with how to avoid be held accountable for your actions or for you lack of educational results.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  44. Same for any union job by grasshoppa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The same could be said for any position which is covered by a union. You wouldn't believe how hard it is to get rid of deadwood in a local city government position, and it's strictly because of the unions and contracts.

    Meanwhile, those without the seniority( but rock their jobs ) are the first up for lay offs. Unions are the cause of this insanity.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  45. Re:Simple answer by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Part of the problem is, what metric are you using to judge the teacher?

    If you judge by student performance, you run into two problems: stupid/unmotivated kids, and "teaching the test" issues.
    If you judge by observers, what method do you use to observe?

    I work in higher ed - we regularly get kids coming in that I am flabbergasted that they EVER got through high school. Unfortunately, in TexAss, the "top 10%" of each high school is automatically required to be able to enter any state College.

    So since we aren't a "top tier" university, we are forced to take the "top 10%" of kids from Redneckistan, Mexishithole, ElBarrio, MiniAfrica, and NewZimbabwe High Schools - you know, the kids who "graduated with a 4.0 GPA" and yet have NO writing skills, NO speaking skills, and barely can manage 3rd-grade mathematics and english equivalence. They expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter - after all, they were socially promoted for 12 grades beforehand, their education paid for completely (and will continue to be so, even the ILLEGALS who shouldn't even be in this country might be getting tuition waivers and in-state rate soon, which is fucked up beyond belief when the kids on our military bases don't get that), the test standards constantly lowered for them, the curriculum altered, the language taught not the language they need to use in this country, and of course, the standardized tests removed because it was easier to stop testing than try to explain why there was a "racial disparity" between black/white/asian/hispanic/etc in the results every year.

    You know what? We get feedback from the people we send out every year, the new teachers out there. What do they tell us?

    - The parents WILL NOT help discipline the kids.
    - The parents WILL NOT make sure the kids are doing the work.
    - The parents will start screaming "lawsuit" if you suggest that little Tyrell, LaShawna, or Chiquita needs to go back a grade because they can't keep up with the expected standard.
    - The school administrations WILL NOT back the teacher up if there is a discipline problem - let alone the drug and gang problems they are dealing with.
    - The school administrations WILL NOT back up the teacher on giving a kid poor grade once the parents scream - doesn't matter if they never do a bit of work, never turn in homework, and even if they were in the bathroom doing crack during test time, the TEACHER gets blamed for the kid's performance.

    I know there are "bad teachers" out there. You know what? There are EVEN SHITTIER KIDS OUT THERE.

  46. Re:Simple answer by Deagol · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know there are "bad teachers" out there. You know what? There are EVEN SHITTIER KIDS OUT THERE.

    As a homeschooling parent, I'll play devil's advocate here. The law says The Children must attend school, but it can't require them to actually be good students (be it grades or, for the most part, behavior).

    Since public school authority over kids has been emasculated over the years, preventing them from doing real enforcement for problem kids, the proper solution is simply to repeal compulsory education. They should still collect *some* taxes to support a system where people who want to be educated can go. Then, the schools can have a sane policy for kicking people out, since their mission will be to, you know, educate kids, as opposed to play tax-funded babysitters for shitty parents.

    Yeah, yeah... an educated citizenry is a cornerstone of a healthy, productive society. How's that working out, anyway?

  47. Re:Simple answer by narrowhouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Almost every criteria you put forward is subjective, and the rest of what you propose (Conference, Observe, Remediate, Terminate) bears a strong resemblance to union contracts in many fields.

    The problem is that management and parents never want to follow the rules that are laid out in the contract. Read the comments in this thread and you will see that many people are complaining about the fact that at some stage in a process similar to what you outline the teacher was found to be competent/compliant with the rules. People want to fire "bad teachers", but they want to fire them the second they themselves identify them, not wait until after there has been some verifiable non-subjective proof of wrongdoing or incompetence.

    Any review or remediation will be called "bureaucratic obstacles" or "politics" by the people who think this is easy. See bad teacher=fire bad teacher, simple.

    Never mind the teachers that would get fired because they tried to teach something that violated the parent's world view (e.g. evolution).

    I'm sure every person in this thread who is in favor of abolishing tenure is well intentioned, but most of them have probably never found themselves unemployed at the age of 55 with a "bad teacher" reputation hung around their neck because the school board realized they could save tens of thousands in salary and retirement costs by firing a teacher that ran against them in the last election.

    At least removing obstacles from the firing path will never lead to a world where teachers will be afraid to publicly complain about waste and corruption in the schools, right? Whistle blower laws are just another legal trick in the union's arsenal.

    The teachers that are "bad" because they dared to tell a well connected parent that their precious little butterfly has no business being in an advanced class will sleep better knowing that they lost their job to save us from the scourge of easily identified bad teachers.

     

    --


    Insert pithy comment here.
  48. Re:Simple answer by TrekkieGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, yeah... an educated citizenry is a cornerstone of a healthy, productive society. How's that working out, anyway?

    As far as I know, it's working out fantastically. Do you have an example of a nation without compulsory education that has a standard of living greater than ours?

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  49. Re:Simple answer by Moryath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do you have an example of a nation without compulsory education that has a standard of living greater than ours?

    No, but I know of several nations with better standards of living that, not un-coincidentally, have a "compulsory" education system that properly rewards excellence and punishes failure, rather than letting the kids simply slide through and come out the other end uneducated due to their own stupidity and misbehavior.

    The movie Idiocracy also comes to mind for some reason...

  50. Re:Simple answer by Moryath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Word of advice about Missouri: the southwestern part of the state is horrifyingly conservative. If you like more liberal, open-minded types

    "Liberal" and "open-minded" are two terms that in my experience are completely contradictory. "Liberals" are people who are (at least) just as hateful and malicious towards anyone who doesn't fit their chosen groupthink, as what you probably would claim "conservatives" are like.

    If you're going to be "open minded", you're willing to see the argument and the objective positive and negative points from multiple sides of any argument. Liberals, by definition, come at their argument pre-biased to the left and are therefore never "open minded."

    Now, if you want to find an open minded area, you need to find someplace centrist. Given the way that both political parties have been fucking around with districts and going around trying to polarize debate whenever possible, those are becoming harder and harder to find.

    But I'm guessing - based on your phrasing above - that what you really are looking is for someplace that will blindly reinforce your own groupthink, rather than challenging you to actually examine your own beliefs and ideas with, say, an open mind.

  51. Re:Simple answer by TrekkieGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, but I know of several nations with better standards of living that, not un-coincidentally, have a "compulsory" education system that properly rewards excellence and punishes failure, rather than letting the kids simply slide through and come out the other end uneducated due to their own stupidity and misbehavior.

    Relax pal, there's a reason why I replied to the other guy, and not to you. You were arguing against the overall culture of being afraid to give bad grades to students / have them repeat a grade lest the parents file a lawsuit. I agree with you, that's insane.

    The person I was replying to was arguing against compulsory education, and that simply doesn't work. Too many fucking stupid parents would love to have their kids around as slave labor all day, doing chores while the parents watch tv (I've seen that happening in Brazil where, at the time, compulsory education was law, but not always enforced). Not sending your child to school (homeschooling is fine, if standards are set and the children are tested periodically to ensure they're learning the required subjects) is denying them the opportunity to have a successful career in the future. Anyone has to agree that's child abuse.

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  52. Re:Simple answer by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mod parent up. I've said it a million times. Once parents (a huge voting block) figure out that no politican will ever blame that voting block for anything their children do, instead casting the blame on video games, metal, rap, drugs and teachers, there's no turning back.

    I'll be the first person to call out a shitty teacher or an obstructive union, but this kind of discussion cannot go ahead without factoring a huge dataset: Parents. Of course, the first person who does finds himself voted out of office pretty quickly.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  53. Re:Simple answer by mgblst · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a problem, all teachers get complaints. You get complaints if you try to teach evolution to christians, or mathematics to dumb kids, or cooking to boys, or woodwork to girls, or sports to fat kids.

    Parents are basically, a complete bunch of wankers.

  54. Re:Simple answer by Venik · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It would seem there is no simple answer. Coming from Russia and having a wider basis for comparison, it would seem to me schools are holding on to bad teachers for two reasons: lack of of desire to deal with teacher unions and lack of qualified replacements. The latter seems to be the bigger problem. Indeed, replacing one bumbling idiot with another hardly justifies the effort. In my humble opinion, the US education system is even more screwed up than the health care system. Just like it is not worth the effort firing bad teachers (or bad college professors, for that matter), I believe its a waste of time trying to fix the system. Just keep doing what we were doing: create conditions for more European-educated teachers and professors to come to this country. Not a very patriotic approach, but probably a more practical one.

  55. Re:Simple answer by rleibman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a libertarian I ask you to please reconsider school vouchers as a bad idea. School vouchers will give government officials an hook into private schools. Once people are used to receiving money from the gvment they find it hard to stop, and little by little they start requesting more and more requirements from private schools in order be "voucher" worthy, until private and public schools are the same.

  56. Re:Simple answer by fugue · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now, if you want to find an open minded area, you need to find someplace centrist.

    Bullshit. Just because a position is midway between two others does not mean it is openminded.

    There are openminded people who call themselves liberals, and (far fewer, but they're out there; see below) openminded people who call themselves conservatives. There are people who will accuse you of not being openminded if you disagree with them. There are people who have looked at a situation from many angles and formed a very well-informed opinion based on much evidence, and who are accused of closedmindedness because they're not willing to give a second chance to old anecdotes that waeren't worth anything the first time either.

    Openmindedness is a willingness to evaluate new evidence, or a willingness to consider different axioms, both of which are pretty much antithetical--by definition--to everything that conservatives stand for. It is not the willingness to humour stupid people.

    --
    "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
  57. Re:Simple answer by Eskarel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think by "open-minded" the parent probably means doesn't hate everyone who isn't exactly like them. This is Missouri we're talking about and conservative doesn't mean the same thing down there as it does up in the blue states.

    We're not talking about libertarians with conservative economic views, we're talking rednecks and christian fundamentalists. Compared to that lot, the most closed minded, group thinking liberals are generally a breath of fresh air.

    I know that it's fashionable to hate the liberals here on Slashdot because group think here says cut taxes and screw everyone and everything else, but remember that liberal and conservative have context, and there's a pretty good chance that wherever it is you live it isn't the deep south.

  58. Re:Simple answer by Ihlosi · · Score: 5, Informative
    Especially if one might state the trivial argument that we can't reliably predict weather 1 week out, and we're making huge claims over the weather in 100 years.

    Schools should teach some basic statistics. This includes the difference between statistically analyzing a random variable (climate science) and trying to predict the outcome of a single instance of the random variable (weather prediction), and why the two are fundamentally different.

    There are other arguments, like that the sun is a 1400 petawatt nuclear reactor, and a 0.0001% variation is solar temperatures will make a hell of a lot more difference to earth temperatures than 1000 years of coal burning.

    Schools should teach the Stefan-Boltzmann law in physics class. It gives a good first approximation of the impact of a 0.0001% variation of photosphere temperature on Earths surface temperature (it's, um, 0.0001%, or about 280 uKelvin. Good luck finding a thermometer that's that accurate).

  59. Re:Simple answer by TrekkieGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh? I don't agree.

    Ok, I should have said, "any intelligent person who actually took the time to think this through," not just "anyone."

    No, I'm not insulting your intelligence yet, but I don't think you've thought this through. Here's why:

    I know plenty of "stupid" people with rather successful careers doing electrical work, carpentry, plumbing, and factory labor and they make more than I do as a degreed child behavioral worker.

    They're not "stupid," they're uneducated. I didn't say "uneducated parents" would want to keep their children home doing chores, I think many of them would see the benefit in their child getting the education they lack. I said "stupid parents" were those who chose to believe an education is not important to their children.

    There's no reason someone with a high school diploma, or even a college degree would be unable to also pick up the skills and have a rather successful career doing electrical work, carpentry, pumbling, and factory labor. You take someone whose parents kept them from school and now unskilled jobs are their only choice. If they want a career that requires a college education, that opportunity has been taken from them by their parents, before they were old enough to make a decision by themselves.

    You don't need a degree to succeed in this country, if you have work ethic and a good market for your skills

    You don't? I just did a search for the types of jobs you mentioned, and every single one of them had the same requirement, as in this example. They require a High School diploma or GED.

    Sure, you could start your own business, if you're smart enough and good enough, but "Good market for your skills" is a key phrase you used there, especially in a place where you'll be competing with large amounts of immigrants who have the trade skills you mentioned, as well as outsourcing for unskilled jobs such as call centers.

    No, success isn't a given with education. However, not having an education can hurt you, while having it never will.

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  60. It ain't fair. by kcdoodle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yep, I went the long route. Tried college, tried the Military, tried college again.

    Couple of guys from high school who struggled to get D's started a lawn care and snow removal business. While I was farting around in the Navy and in college, they were making a couple of hundred grand a year with a crew of workers under them.

    Now I have a great job, and those guys are probably retired. Boo fricking hoo.

    Education is a bunch of facts and ideas that can help you be more successful. Intelligence is the ability to cope and thrive in your environment. Neither concept is a complete subset of the other.

    --

    - I live the greatest adventure anyone could possibly desire. - Tosk the Hunted
  61. Re:Simple answer by Sandbags · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Children not only need to learn material, far more imortantly, especially in younger kids, is that they learn social interaction, group discipline, experience varied environments, work in groups, experience physical activities and sports, work in teams, compete, etc. NO home schhol environment can offer this.

    By educating your children at home you are stunting their social and psychological growth.

    The biggest problem with American Schools is NOT the school, curriculum, or teachers, it's the PARENTS! Americans VERY INCORRECTLY assume that thgeir kid goes to school to learn and comes how with homework and that's all they need. FALSE! EVERY KID IS HOMESCHOOLED!!! When they come home, they should be LEARNING FROM YOU, and receiving the supplemental education that YOU think they should have above and beyond their lessons in school provide.

    If you child is not disciplined in school, it's 90% likely it's YOUR fault. If your child is not learning what you want them to learn, it;s YOUR fault. The school curriculum is provided free as a BASE education to prepare them for the basic needs of life and for those who rise to it, preperation for college, but it IS NOT the sum of their education.

    Sure, at home you can teach them math, science, writing, etc, but I seriously doubt there is a single home school parent out there who can provide a dynamic environment for education at home, who can perform all the lab expereiments required, afford to take their child on trips to experience the world outside their books, who can bring performances and programs into the house, and who can provide the social environment to allow their child to excel to more than simple smarts in life.

    My wife IS a teacher. You would expect an elementary teacher would be a NATURAL resource to home school. In her decade teaching, she has taught about 30 children that were previously home schooled, and EVERY SINGLE ONE had social problems, was far behind the rest of their class in at leasdt one if not all subjects, had serious issues with authority and direction, was virtually incapable of working in teams, and had no idea how to behave in a gym or when playing sports, and had no competitive ability without a serious psychological slant to it.

    Life happens OUTSIDE of books. School is designed to get them the basic education they deserve based on the effort YOU convince them to put forward. It prepares them for life and the social interactions it requires. Sometimes getting their ass kicked is PART of that learning process. Being exposed to situations and things they don't fully understand is also part of that process. When they come home, it;s YOUR JOB to help them disceminate what they EXPERIENCED, plus what they learned, and help them form an understanding and move up the ladder of life.

    WAY too many parents simply think dropping their kid off at school and picking them up is good enough, and all they need to do at home is talk about drugs, sex, drinking, condoms, and AIDS and they're done, the TV can do the rest... WRONG!

    If you don't like the education (knowledge) the school provides, either supplement it at home or put them in a private school or prep school whenre they teach on higher levels, but DO NOT take the rest of learning, the LIFE learning, away from a child by isolating them at home.

    Home schooling with truly dedicated parents who not only educate, but also discipline their child, continually bring them to exhibitions, theatre, museums and the like, and who involve their children in social systems and team sports are a rarity, but with lots of time and money it can be successful. But the harsh reality is very few of the 1.1 million children being legally homeschooled will receive such treatment, and many enter into lives of crime or violence(reaction to isolation and strict rule, or heavily religious environments), or become socially isolated and fail to compete in the workplace. Additionally, colleges tend to frown on home-school admissions that are not accompanied by extremel

    --
    There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.