How would you fix the American public education system?

[Jumping In Puddles]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

[mirth]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

 

I would increase starting teacher pay to $85,000/yr topping out at $200k, both with full benefits. All positions would require re-interviewing within a general applicant pool.

 

(Sorry my idea has no carryover)

[Perry]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

 

1. Real school choice.

2. Overhaul schools of education. Better yet, get rid of them and require teachers to have a degree in a content area.

3. Once 2 is done, increase teacher pay.

 

 

 

Ducking and running. :auto:

[Murphy101]

I would completely do away with it.

If local communities wanted to create schools, they could pool resources, but I don't think any govt/tax should be involved.

[JillZ]

Hire teachers as professionals and treat them as professionals (well-trained, pay based on merit, etc.). Also, I would support the development of many new charter schools which would have much more control over curriculum, etc. Although there are many charter schools that fail, many of them do succeed. I would keep trying until there are enough successful charter schools for every public-schooled child.

[JillZ]

I would completely do away with it.

If local communities wanted to create schools, they could pool resources, but I don't think any govt/tax should be involved.

 

Wow, if we really did this, I may have never had the opportunity to go school, along with millions of other children.

[Murphy101]

Wow, if we really did this, I may have never had the opportunity to go school, along with millions of other children.

 

Where there's a will to learn, there will be a way to learn.

Was before public govt schools and would be again.

And I'm completely okay with it not being at a school.

[stripe]

Promoting ideas that are more about encouraging learning rather than just crowd control and compliance.

 

Encouraging young, fresh blood even if it's only for a limited amount of time.

 

Decreasing homework time and encourage interesting out of school, real world projects and independent reading and exploration.

 

Eliminate busy work entirely.

 

Presenting ideas more as an integrated whole than as a series of disjointed parts. On the most extreme angle this would be some sort of return to single teacher teaching a group of students in many areas, but it could involve team teaching and such, or even just coordination of schedules across the disciplines. It's an idea, anyway.

 

Changing education degrees to be more about content and less about educational theory. Pass this along with internships and on-the-job training, including having a supervising "big brother/sister" type of thing for new teachers.

 

Eliminate the rigid intellectual "tracking" system whereby certain children are identified as smart/average/dumb at some early age and piped into their stream. Realize that some kids may have a knack for one area and not another. Consider classes aimed at certain levels that students of different ages may attend, instead of just 10th grade English or something.

 

Promoting good health (sleep, diet, financial) and other useful day-to-day information for both students and teachers in a welcoming, not mandatory, not Big Brotherish manner. Provide opportunities for parents to enrich their own education and become involved with their children's education; too often the school comes between the parent and child, instead of involving the parents.

 

I would not get rid of schools. I have family members with illiterate parents who were able to go to school and far exceed what was available in remote areas or by their own community. It's not always the case that where there's a desire, opportunities present themselves and everything falls into place. It takes help from others and schools are a way of organizing that.

Edited November 20, 2009 by stripe

[st_claire]

I would completely do away with it.

If local communities wanted to create schools, they could pool resources, but I don't think any govt/tax should be involved.

 

:iagree:

[st_claire]

Wow, if we really did this, I may have never had the opportunity to go school, along with millions of other children.

 

Millions of children don't today. But heavy taxation means there is less money available to people to choose to give it to help others, such as by paying for a poor child's school costs. The government spends upwards of $15,000 per year per child on public schooling. IMO a child can be schooled for much less. I'd rather my money go towards helping more children rather than a privillaged few favoured by the government.

[Stacy in NJ]

via charter schools, virtual schools, vouchers, cooperatives, and homeschooling with tax dollars.

 

Part of the failure of our current system stems from the monopoly government schools have on our tax stream. Break the connect between local public schools and tax dollars; allow the tax dollars to follow the child to whatever educational venue the parents decide (within reasonable parameters). This would create more competitiveness, flexibility and responsiveness within public education.

 

It seems barbaric to me that a modern society should offer its citizen only one educational option - the local public school. Why can't we have more choices?

Edited November 20, 2009 by Stacy in NJ
sp

[JillZ]

Millions of children don't today. But heavy taxation means there is less money available to people to choose to give it to help others, such as by paying for a poor child's school costs. The government spends upwards of $15,000 per year per child on public schooling. IMO a child can be schooled for much less. I'd rather my money go towards helping more children rather than a privillaged few favoured by the government.

 

I do agree that children can be schooled for much less than $15,000 per year. However, the government (at least in the US) has a mandate to see that all children are educated, regardless of income, social status, family stability, etc., and that often ends up costing a lot of money. I do believe though that things can, and should, be done for a lot less.

[kindermommy]

Promoting ideas that are more about encouraging learning rather than just crowd control and compliance.

 

Encouraging young, fresh blood even if it's only for a limited amount of time.

 

Decreasing homework time and encourage interesting out of school, real world projects and independent reading and exploration.

 

Eliminate busy work entirely.

 

Presenting ideas more as an integrated whole than as a series of disjointed parts. On the most extreme angle this would be some sort of return to single teacher teaching a group of students in many areas, but it could involve team teaching and such, or even just coordination of schedules across the disciplines. It's an idea, anyway.

 

Changing education degrees to be more about content and less about educational theory. Pass this along with internships and on-the-job training, including having a supervising "big brother/sister" type of thing for new teachers.

 

Eliminate the rigid intellectual "tracking" system whereby certain children are identified as smart/average/dumb at some early age and piped into their stream. Realize that some kids may have a knack for one area and not another. Consider classes aimed at certain levels that students of different ages may attend, instead of just 10th grade English or something.

 

Promoting good health (sleep, diet, financial) and other useful day-to-day information for both students and teachers in a welcoming, not mandatory, not Big Brotherish manner. Provide opportunities for parents to enrich their own education and become involved with their children's education; too often the school comes between the parent and child, instead of involving the parents.

 

I would not get rid of schools. I have family members with illiterate parents who were able to go to school and far exceed what was available in remote areas or by their own community. It's not always the case that where there's a desire, opportunities present themselves and everything falls into place. It takes help from others and schools are a way of organizing that.

 

The majority of these ideas (which are *all* great) could be solved by doing two things:

 

1. Decrease class size dramatically (like under 10 per class - 6-8 preferably).

No need for crowd control, less disruptions. Less time needed to focus on "compliance" or "social skills". Personal relationships are stronger between teacher and students and teacher can tailor educational needs more individually and appropriately. This would then alleviate the need for so many remedial or advanced pull out programs/staff and LABELS.

 

2. Revamp and tighten requirements for the teacher education system - content area focus is a great idea, although for elementary, focusing on child development/readiness would probably be more appropriate. I saw many teachers *easily* get through the training system that should NOT have been there (not to say I am *all that* but I was very dedicated and serious about my future job and I saw many that were in it for the WRONG reasons)

 

I would also not get rid of schools. They have their place and it is in our country's best interest to create a system that can educate those that otherwise would not be educated. Now, how to go about that system might be different than we see it now (maybe put control over to smaller government and less federal and maybe even state intervention)f??. I'm not as confident about my suggestions in regards to the politics of it all, but I do know about what I'd like to see "on the front line" (i.e. in the classrooms - I taught for 10 years prior to homeschooling)

[st_claire]

Where in the US are there millions of children who don't have access to schools?

 

Where did I say the US? I said millions of children today do not have access to schools. The world consists of more than just the USA fyi.

[st_claire]

The question was "How would you fix the American public education system?"

 

I don't think you had to be nasty about it.

 

 

Yes, and the answer that I agreed with was to get rid of it. Your reason against that was because it would result in some children not having access to school. My response to that was that its existance in fact results in many more children not having access to school.

 

I'm sorry if you felt it was nasty, but people thinking the 1st world is the whole world is a huge pet peeve of mine. Why should a kid gets special treatment just because of where he was born?

[Daisy]

They could start by letting teachers teach rather than forcing them all to be on the exact same lesson at the exact same time as everyone else regardless of the demographics of the children in the classroom.

 

They could allow a teacher to tutor children during his/her lunch break if that is what they chose to do EVEN if the district has given up on the child.

 

They could buy enough textbooks for every child. They could buy all the components of a curriculum rather than just picking and choosing.

 

They could stop hounding 20 year teaching veterans so badly that they retire early because they are stick to death of the system.

 

They could stop hiring kids right out of college who have no experience because they are cheaper.

 

They could actually care about the kids rather than just saying that they do.

 

They could give teachers the ability to actually discipline in the classroom rather than applying a label to every misbehaving child.

 

They could stop changing teaching methodologies every 6 months and actually allow something enough time to work.

 

They could pay teachers based on their education levels and job performance. I do not advocate pay based on test scores because it is absolutely not the teacher's fault that Johnny came into his classroom and could not read, has parents who cannot read, and does not own a book.

 

How long do you want me to go? The changes needed in public education are vast. The very first thing my public school teaching hubby advocates is getting rid of any nationalized oversight. Get rid of the National Department of Education and return control of public education to the states.

[Crimson Wife]

via charter schools, virtual schools, vouchers, cooperatives, and homeschooling with tax dollars.

 

Part of the failure of our current system stems from the monopoly government schools have on our tax stream. Break the connect between local public schools and tax dollars; allow the tax dollars to follow the child to whatever educational venue the parents decide (within reasonable parameters). This would create more competitiveness, flexibility and responsiveness within public education.

 

It seems barbaric to me that a modern society should offer its citizen only one educational option - the local public school. Why can't we have more choices?

 

:iagree:

 

We as a country have no problem providing vouchers for college (Pell Grants) that can be used at whatever school the student wishes- government-run, private secular, or religious-affiliated. Why can't it be that way for K-12?

 

Socialist, highly secular Sweden has vouchers for goodness sakes- why can't the U.S.?

[BMW]

Just off the top of my head....

 

I would draw a line in the sand and say... "Hey, communities out there... enjoy the school that were built... it's NOW up to each city/county to decide on their schools..." and have big government back out. If the big government wants to offer guidelines that they consider for a "good education", well, fine... but let each county be in charge if their schools.

 

Do away with all the ridiculous "state standards" crap and stop "teaching to the test" (unless in a county that is what everyone wanted... guess there would have to be local voting... local school boards with members that represent several walks of life...).

 

Then, take a HARD look at what was taught 150 years ago. Take curriculum from back at that time and update it... don't revise everything necessarily, but adopt the standards. Seems to me (again off the top of my head from gleaning) that our population used to be much smarter in the area of language and mathematics. Then take a look at the curriculum out there... NOT the state required text books, but actual curriculum for math... language arts... writing... There are so many great resources for teaching that are not used in the school districts because they (teachers) are required to teach for state standards with state designated texts, etc.

 

And, like someone else posted... give several options!! Why have one choice? Get the charter schools going...

 

And for heaven's sake, definately raise pay for teachers!

[Rosie_0801]

How about putting some of the responsibility for achievement back onto students? I don't know about you guys, but my dh had to chase students around to try and make them hand in assignments or show up for oral exams. Surely that stuff should be their responsibility? Handing in your work and showing up shouldn't be a favour you do for teachers you like!

 

Rosie

[Chris in VA]

I don't think they can be fixed.

[Aubrey]

I'd get rid of schools, too. I know it wouldn't be a perfect solution, but it would put responsibility for kids back on parents, where it ought to be. No more using schools as day care facilities/holding cells. No more getting mad on holidays because now you have nowhere to send your kids.

 

Some will get a better education--either from private schools (w/ or w/out scholarships) or from hsing, which perhaps couldn't be justified in a poor family when ps is available. Some will get to work sooner. Some will not do well, but some do not do well now. At least no one will be required by law to coexist in the same building with them any more. Unless of course that building actually IS a prison.

 

And ftr, I taught for 10 yrs before hsing, too, give or take a yr. Most of my work was at the college level, but I did spend a yr w/ preschoolers and a couple w/ ps highschoolers. I was in a very rough district, fwiw.

[JillZ]

:iagree:

 

We as a country have no problem providing vouchers for college (Pell Grants) that can be used at whatever school the student wishes- government-run, private secular, or religious-affiliated. Why can't it be that way for K-12?

 

Socialist, highly secular Sweden has vouchers for goodness sakes- why can't the U.S.?

 

The reason many are against vouchers is because they are concerned that minorities and low-performing students will be the only ones left in public schools as all of the "good" students "escape" from public schooling.

 

Sweden doesn't have that problem because they don't have a minority population to speak of.

[athena1277]

One thing that would be helpful is to do a better job with teacher internships. When I interned in 2000, it was only about 8 weeks long. Only 4 of those weeks did I teach all day. It may be comparing apples to oranges, but think about medical interships: they intern for years and get paid while doing it. A student teacher teaches a few weeks and has to pay to do it! New teachers really need more support. All those educational theories don't help that much in a real classroom.

 

It would also help for teachers to have more say in what curriculum they use. When I taught, I was handed a box and that is what I was expected to use. Thankfully it was decent stuff, but sometimes it's not. I wonder how many teachers hated to teach "new math" years ago, knowing that it was garbage, but not having a choice.

 

I could go on more about teacher pay, classroom size, and more, but I'll stop there. :D

[FairProspects]

Deal with the poverty issue. Educate parents how to parent, handle conflict, provide the best educational stimulation for their children and create stable home environments. When teacher's time is taken up solely dealing with the behavioral problems from kids with these kinds of difficulties, there is no way they can be present to do their true job of educating.

[Rosie_0801]

including having a supervising "big brother/sister" type of thing for new teachers.

 

This is a nice idea, but isn't as simple as it sounds. My dh supposedly had a mentor when he first started teaching. Unfortunately she was too overworked to devote the necessary time to mentoring (an extra responsibility which took time but paid no extra) and didn't teach within his subject area. There was no one within a 200km radius that taught his subject area, actually.

 

It would be nice if class sizes actually reflected the teacher's ability to manage. A subject that is assessed using worksheets takes far less time to mark than one that is assessed on video. Dh had the largest class sizes in the state during his first year, and that included those with PhDs who taught in adult education. What it really comes down to, is that teachers need to have more limited working hours. They should not have to spend their weekends and nights marking, having no time for a private life. Some subjects are more work to teach than others. Obviously smaller class sizes require more teachers, and they are rather expensive. Perhaps, and this is going to be a radical idea, schools should take funding away from their sport budgets! Specialty schools need state of the art sports facilities, but the average school kid can play sport on a grass oval and take swimming lessons after school, or at least at the local leisure centre.

 

The charter school idea is a nice one too. To have that be a successful model, however, we'd need to train the population away from ideas of standardized curriculum and vocational training. Any ideas on how we'd do that? Other than oblige parents to take a written exam based on an educational theory reading list before schools will enrol their children? Lol. Hang on, some of you guys have spoken about classical schools obliging parents to read certain books. Maybe it's not a silly idea?

 

They could allow a teacher to tutor children during his/her lunch break if that is what they chose to do EVEN if the district has given up on the child.

 

Interesting. Over here, teachers are OBLIGED to tutor children during their lunch break, if they are asked. So, teachers who work hard to be good at their jobs must work at nights, on weekends, and often don't get lunch or tea breaks at school. In any other career, that would be illegal.

 

 

Rosie

Edited November 20, 2009 by Rosie_0801

[Stacy in NJ]

I don't think they can be fixed.

 

Right. It's a cultural thing. They don't value the educational opportunities they're provided.:glare:

[FairProspects]

One thing that would be helpful is to do a better job with teacher internships. When I interned in 2000, it was only about 8 weeks long. Only 4 of those weeks did I teach all day. It may be comparing apples to oranges, but think about medical interships: they intern for years and get paid while doing it. A student teacher teaches a few weeks and has to pay to do it! New teachers really need more support. All those educational theories don't help that much in a real classroom.

 

See, and this was the exact opposite of my experience. It really varies by state & licensure requirements. I had to intern for 23+ weeks (full semester), 19 of which I was teaching, 17-18 full-time. I was so ready to get paid for all my work by the end of the semester that I wanted to scream :D!

Edited November 20, 2009 by FairProspects

[Sputterduck]

Fix it? I don't think that's even possible.

[Stacy in NJ]

who would sacrifice who knows what to be offered the educational opportunites even the poorest students in the USofA have access to. Those same American students throw those opportunites away with both hands because they simple don't value them.

 

Free public education has firmly established feelings of both entitlement and contempt for education in some students.

 

The responsibility for the education of children needs to return to where it belongs: with parents/families, and then as the child matures, themselves.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I definitely believe in school choice, charters, cyber charters, vouchers, and even funding homeschooling for those who desire it. I suspect the schools are complacent and are not innovative since there is no competition. I believe that there are many people in the school system but there is still problems IMHO due to lack of competition and possibly unions. I also think some parents are part of the problem as well.

 

I also think that schools could be improved by offering more individualization with technology so to speak. Some schools are now able to offer virtual classes in topics that they would not otherwise be able to offer.

 

I do think teachers should be paid well, but from what I understand in my neck the woods they do get paid well and get cadillac benefits as well. In fact, I almost choked when I read of a local teacher who was paid $70,000/year which is a lot for this area and that does not even include the cadillac insurance and pension. As an RN I was never paid that much even when I worked in critical care for many years nor did I have cadillac benefits or a defined benefit pension program paying about 70% of salary upon retirement. Only now are RNs in the area catching up salary wise but not benefit wise in comparison to teaching. Now granted other areas of the country have much higher living expenses than my neck of the woods, so please keep that in mind:) I guess I think that it would be great to pay teachers a large amount like the one example above, however, it does not sit well with me when the school district wants to increase our property taxes 6% every year while the most of the local population does not even come close to the pay or benefits of the school district.

 

Just my 2 cents:)

Edited November 20, 2009 by priscilla
clarify

[LisaKinVA]

1. I would fire all of the non-essential administrators. Each school has a Principal, a Vice Principal (instead of 3 or 4), and there is a SMALL Budgetary office that the state owould have (also get rid of the DOE at the federal level, and make it a budgetary office as well) Mainly because in MOST states I've lived in they have more people "administrating" the education bureaucracy than teaching!)

 

2. Create pod-like class areas grouped around common areas. Each pod would have a level-based class. Much like High School, children would attend a "homeroom" -- this class would focus on Language Arts, History, Geography/Social Studies/Art, then the classes would "switch" to Math, Science and Music Appreciation OR Instrumental. (This would be elementary). The switch would be at lunch time to avoid too much disruption.

 

The pod areas would serve as craft/group activity places (for cooking activities, as well as general crafts). Class days/times would rotate for the pods.

 

3. Recognize that while the students may be grouped by level at the beginning of the year, not all students learn at the same rate. This would allow students who move through material quickly to do so.

 

4. Let parents choose schools -- open it up to charter schools, which have specific focuses, and virtual schools.

 

5. As students mature (middle-high school age groups), allow for different STUDENT/PARENT chosen different educational tracks.

 

Life has taken me away... and I cannot spend more time

[Supertechmom]

If they can be fixed which I don't believe they can, they should start with refusing to allow any but the top 10% of high school students in the country to even apply to teaching schools. And then they should have to have an actual degree in an area of learning. Not a teaching degree. The last year or first couple of years on the job could then be spent in the classroom learning along side an experienced teacher how to manage the classroom. Get the best and brightest back into the classrooms to train the next group. Kids would benefit far more from teachers who understood the subject they were teaching well enough to be able to relate to the children on several levels and not just the rote formula they learned.

 

And that's just for starters. The system is so broke that it really just needs to be dumped and something else started.

[Lovedtodeath]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

Smaller classes and shorter days. Every grade would be split into morning or afternoon classes. Schools would no longer serve child care needs, but would serve educational needs only. The one room school houses seemed to work pretty good. Why not go back to that instead of making kids all learn the same thing according to age?

[BakersDozen]

Haven't read every page but here's what I would do:

 

1. Make the first year of each grade free. If kids fail, the parents get to pay for them to repeat the grade. Put the responsibility back on the parents and stop moving kids up who should not be.

 

2. Combine grade levels: K/1; 2/3; 4/5, etc. Multi-level is more challenging, IMO.

 

3. Separate boys and girls to their own side of the room.

 

4. P.E. every day

 

5. Use same books year after year. Enough replacing perfectly good books with new ones!

[Audrey]

1. Real school choice.

2. Overhaul schools of education. Better yet, get rid of them and require teachers to have a degree in a content area.

3. Once 2 is done, increase teacher pay.

 

 

 

Ducking and running. :auto:

 

 

I'll give a big :iagree:to #2 there.

 

Another thing I would do is require competency exams for teachers in their subject area on a periodic basis.

 

And another thing I would do is dedicate the elementary years to the basics -- reading, maths, and writing primarily, with science and history secondary. Tertiary studies would include one additional language other than English, and music and art. IOW, cut out the bs time wasters.

 

Lastly, eliminate homework. It burns out kids on learning anything. If a teacher cannot teach the basic mandatory requirements over the 7 or so hours each day, then they simply aren't teaching and need to be removed.

[Lovedtodeath]

5. Use same books year after year. Enough replacing perfectly good books with new ones!

:iagree:

 

Lastly, eliminate homework. It burns out kids on learning anything. If a teacher cannot teach the basic mandatory requirements over the 7 or so hours each day, then they simply aren't teaching and need to be removed.

:iagree:

[Audrey]

 

2. Combine grade levels: K/1; 2/3; 4/5, etc. Multi-level is more challenging, IMO.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely NOT! I have seen this in action in our tiny town schools around here and it is a miserable failure. However, I will acquiesce that it may have as much to do with the incompetency of the teachers as it does with combining the students for multiple years.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

1. Real school choice.

2. Overhaul schools of education. Better yet, get rid of them and require teachers to have a degree in a content area.

3. Once 2 is done, increase teacher pay.

 

 

 

Ducking and running. :auto:

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: The only caveat I have is that if the teachers already make more that average worker in the area, then I am not so sure about increasing pay especially if it involves increasing taxes and they already have cadillac benefits:) OTOH, I am sure that there are plenty of administrators and the like who could be cut in order to increase teacher pay:)

[Rosie_0801]

The reason many are against vouchers is because they are concerned that minorities and low-performing students will be the only ones left in public schools as all of the "good" students "escape" from public schooling.

Sweden doesn't have that problem because they don't have a minority population to speak of.

 

Hmm. I wonder. If our (applying this idea to both your country and mine) major minority groups were to teach in their home language and teach the majority language as a second language. Or, and I don't know if any of you read the "Chalet School" books as kids, but I wonder if their model would work? Say you lived in Florida and the school operated in English on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and Spanish on Tuesday and Thursdays? Or the same idea in Canada, but using English and French? The schools would have to start off small, because there are only so many bilingual teachers around who are able to teach other subjects, but over time that population would grow. Reforms are needed now, but some reforms need to take place over years.

 

I don't know what you mean by vouchers, since we don't have them, but I think there'd be less low performing students if teachers didn't have the joy of teaching sucked out them. Oh, and if they were allowed to use methods that work for that teacher and that student, even if that method wasn't on the list of approved techniques.

 

I suspect the schools are complacent and are not innovative since there is no innovation.

I wonder why governments spout on about the need for creative thinking in schools while they try to ruin the system further by standardising everything, down to wanting all classes to be learning the same thing on the same day. If schools are complacent, I think it's because they have little choice! I'd have thought government standards are necessary, but a principal and his/her teaching team should decide how they are going to go about it. They are the ones actually doing the work. They know their students and themselves.

 

If they can be fixed which I don't believe they can, they should start with refusing to allow any but the top 10% of high school students in the country to even apply to teaching schools.

 

Hmm. That would restore prestige to the profession.

 

Thanks girls! A bit of fun conversation on one of my favourite topics has provided an antidote to my serious sleep deprivation. Now I'm feeling more cheerful, I feel much more able and interested in getting off my bottom and doing something else. Like, Scarlett's quilt patch, maybe?

 

Rosie

[Jean in Newcastle]

I would want -

 

1. smaller teacher to student ratio

 

2. classes based on ability and not age. This is what they did in the old one-room school houses. Yes, it meant that you might have a big strapping farm boy learning his letters with the young kids but that was what he needed to learn.

[SonshineLearner]

I do agree that children can be schooled for much less than $15,000 per year. However, the government (at least in the US) has a mandate to see that all children are educated, regardless of income, social status, family stability, etc., and that often ends up costing a lot of money. I do believe though that things can, and should, be done for a lot less.

 

But, when the mandate was made "education" meant a very different thing. Many children already were reading and they went to a reduced school year. Discipline problems were partially avoided by going at a later age, right?

(and also you had to obey at school, or be "ruled":-)

 

Chanting together seems to be part of what school was, and learning basics seems to have occupied a majority of their time.

 

Hard work/chores outside or in seems like it was a big part of days.

 

And, in America, Church still was part of school. Morals were centered around "God's Law"

 

Their understanding of Morals had to be different, since the Bible is part of what they were taught from.

 

But, to answer the question of what I'd do....

 

I would start children in 2nd or 4rd grade. Before that, I'd offer a Montessori approach of "kindergarten" where literature would be read and acted out.

 

I'd pass the responsibility back to the parents for the children's education before that, by explaining what students need to excel. (Something like "Core Education" recommendations... ED Hirsch)

 

I'd be honest that k and 1st grades are used as babysitters and many kids have no need to be there.

 

I'd start trying to have school time for true academics and not primarily worry about working parents.... (That consideration should be separate and discussed separately)

 

I'd do less than 5 days.... year round. (Maybe if you were going to do younger... you could do those on T/TH and then the others on MWF.)

 

I'd think outside of the box:-)

 

And, I'd remember that....Children are parent's responsibilities. No amount of Government intervention is a substitute for parents.

 

Oh ...yes... I'd privatize schools.... Competition is good for every business:-)

 

Carrie

[FairProspects]

:iagree::iagree::iagree: The only caveat I have is that if the teachers already make more that average worker in the area, then I am not so sure about increasing pay especially if it involves increasing taxes and they already have cadillac benefits:) OTOH, I am sure that there are plenty of administrators and the like who could be cut in order to increase teacher pay:)

 

In our area, the only ones making these kinds of wages/benefits, are the older teachers or administrators. Our state now has caps on the pay raises/pay ceiling of teachers and as a teacher I will always be earning significantly under the average wage in our area, even if I worked for the rest of my life & got a doctorate in my subject area (although I do live in a high COL area). The highly paid teacher argument is a common complaint from tax payers, but post-NCLB, I don't find it to be true anymore for younger teachers.

 

The bigger problem in teacher pay that I see is standardization without differentiation for cost of living. Engineers on the west side here make more in general than engineers on the east side, due to cost of living differences, yet state teacher salaries are standard across the board. That low salary could go much further in a lower cost area but might not qualify you to rent a 1 bedroom apartment here.

[Laurie4b]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

 

School should have a point for each student and that point should not be the same for everyone. However, everyone should have an education that enables him or her to have a contributing place in society.

 

For some students, the goal should be college, but not for all.

 

For some students, the goal should be a particular vocation. Bring back respectable vocational education!!!

 

Graduating from high school should be about meeting your own plan. Not all students need algebra for their life to reach its potential. Some students need lots of experience in spatial relationships and mechanics for their full potential. Others need music. Having goals that are consistent with a child's strengths and personal goals, and that are realistic would go a long way toward student's investing in school. Who wants to work on something that you're bound to fail at? Why not cop an attitude and do as little as possible. But what if instead, your goals for graduating from high school jive with what you can do and want to do?

 

The federal govt should stay out of education except if it wants to give poorer states supplemental money. States should dictate as little as possible to districts, and districts should give teachers freedom to innovate. Parents should be given choices within their districts between differing approaches to teaching. For kids who are "behind", year end testing should be eliminated in favor of a plan for catching up. I can't tell you the number of times I have wished for the low-income students I tutored, that the school would slow down so that they could finally master something before moving on. (The teachers wish this as well.) Why should a student who has not mastered subtraction with borrowing be moved ahead just to be sure to cover stem and leaf plots? (Public school teachers wish this as well.)

 

We have taken away the ability for schools to discipline children. Could kids be put to work nowadays scraping gum off the bottom of desks as they were in years gone by? (etc.) This is where I think maybe school should be a privilege.

 

We should STOP shoving educational goals down to younger and younger ages. No one should be expected to know anything except how to behave when they come to kindergarten. I have a child in tutoring now who in K is expected to read, write, and do math. She can't. She doesn't have basic understanding of the sounds in words or in letters as symbols, but has homework (about 1 hour per day) of writing her spelling words, tracing numbers, etc. I'm sure there will be a conference to retain her. argh.

 

No homework until middle school. That would cut down on the obesity epidemic (as kids I'm familiar with have about 1 hour from K on up. In the winter, if they do their homework first, it's dark and there is no time for play. Homework after a 6 hour day also cuts back on free, creative play time--except for the smart students who get things done super fast. So the educationally rich get richer and the poor get poorer.)

 

Ask for less breadth in elementary school and more depth. Make the goal for kids to get really, really good at the 3 R's.

[Lovedtodeath]

I would want -

 

1. smaller teacher to student ratio

 

2. classes based on ability and not age. This is what they did in the old one-room school houses. Yes, it meant that you might have a big strapping farm boy learning his letters with the young kids but that was what he needed to learn.

 

Smaller classes and shorter days. The one room school houses seemed to work pretty good. Why not go back to that instead of making kids all learn the same thing according to age?

Great minds think alike!:)

[Jenny in Atl]

 

Sweden doesn't have that problem because they don't have a minority population to speak of.

 

Actually they do, about 12% minority (7% non white), and growing.

[Teachaheart]

I would completely do away with it.

If local communities wanted to create schools, they could pool resources, but I don't think any govt/tax should be involved.

 

:iagree:

[Tap]

I would want to see levels instead of grades in public schools. Everyone starts at level one in each subject and then moves up if they are ready. By 5th grade they may be in 6th level reading and 4th for math. Moving kids up who have not mastered concepts doesn't make sence to me. I don't think most kids need to held back an entire grade level if they aren't able to do a core subject like math. I also don't think they should be moved up if they are struggling. I envision it like college that offers Writing 121, 122, 123. You can take them in any order, but they all must be passed before you move on. Oh, and kids should be able to test out of classes, just like college too, so if they are gifted/talented in a certain area they can continue to move up and be challenged without being bogged down in state regs.

 

I would make year round school mandatory, with only full days off (no late start/half-days). I would make the year into 2mth sections. After 5-6 weeks of book work there would be a 1-2 weeks of concepts being applied in a different manner to help alternative learners to grasp concepts that previously confused them, and to offer a review/application model for other kids. A week break, and then back to school. The teacher would work for the break to have time to catch up on thier own independent work/education.

 

Each teacher would be required to take a 5-6 week segment off to further their own education or to pursue a cause/passion related to their course of study/teaching.

 

The entire US would be on one format and they would all have the same requirements for graduation. I almost didn't get to graduate on time due to moving in highschool and the other school not offering the identical classes (It was idiotic things like... I couldn't get the core high school 1 year credit for World History in one state, because the other state broke it into two segments and each had a different name ). I had to retake classes, that had the same concepts, just presented differently.

 

All US states would also have the same level of topics taught in the segments. It was amaing how far behind Colorado was compared to Oregon when I moved in 5th grade. The teacher told my mom to pull me out of school early because I was so bored. Colorado tested me and said if stayed in school, I was going to be moved up two grades and be a 10yo 7th grader, and a 15yo senior. I missed part of 5th and 6th grade due to this.

Edited November 21, 2009 by Tap, tap, tap

[Harriet Vane]

Reduce class size to no larger than 10.

 

Make it easier to fire bad teachers.

[Wildiris]

I'm interested in your thoughts :) Homeschoolers value education and I love

the home education discussions on this board and I'm curious if maybe anyone here has some good ideas from homeschooling that could carry over to the public schools.

:lurk5:

 

 

Some ideas that could transfer from home school to public school might be the concept of valuing an education, valuing learning, and most important valuing the individual learner. Not everyone learns the same way, and schools would better serve students if they treated all students as able learners in a community. No grades. I think narrative evaluations require more thought from the teacher than just a letter grade. A teacher must take the time to articulate what a student has or has not learned and comment on their effort or lack of effort. A student may be more encouraged explore their interests if grades were not the purpose of learning.

 

*Informal classrooms with espresso machine, tea, and food for all. Too many kids go to school hungry.

 

*Small class size

 

*A teacher should be paid as much as a doctor or lawyer.

 

 

[BigMamaBird]

Rather than having giant mega schools, how about smaller neighborhood schools like there used to be decades ago. Stop herding the children in like so many cattle and focus on a smaller more intimate environment. Smaller classes, more parental involvement, less administration.