The reason we can't have honest dialogue about education

[KimberlyH]

I worked in corporate America for approximately 10 years returned to school to earn my MEd, substituted while in school, graduated, then worked a temporary part time teaching position and am now temporarily home with my daughter. All together I spent about 3 years working in the education field. In any of the jobs I held if I had felt free to spew in the same fashion as this teacher did I would expect and feel I deserved some sort of reprimand from my employer. The internet has allowed many people a platform upon which they air way too much of their proverbial dirty laundry. This woman was not attempting to have an honest dialogue about education, she was complaining.

As for the subject of education itself, there's plenty of blame to go around. In my short time in the field I experienced frustration with administration and the feeling of being hung out to dry, questionable teachers, apathetic students, and parents that left me in tears for both myself and their children and their polar opposites. I worked in an afluent district with a great reputation at one of the three "poor" schools. I had children in the foster care system, 10 year old girls who spoke dreamily of turning 16 and having babies, families who lived without running water, and so on. The location didn't change their poverty, literal and figurative, and none of the negativity from those children who needed so much more than I could do to the administrative struggles I faced made my choice to teach any less my choice. No martyr badge necessary, I felt honored to go to work. I also don't see more money solving the multi-faceted problem, my state spends 60% of its large budget on education, it's how the money is spent that makes no sense, in my opinion. I look forward to returning to a classroom one day and doing my miniscule part to help.

 

[ksinger]

Ksinger, come ON. There are several of us here who didn't attend Ivy League schools, who didn't grow up well-to-do, and who didn't have fabulous advantages. Do you really think that those ladies and gentlemen are going to stand up at every chance and shout it from the rooftops of Pricescope that they are not old money or something???

Anyway...as a lowly B.S. degree'd lady (or, however you put that, correct me if I'm wrong), why start a thread like this and then leave? Either come back and hang out and talk with all of us (I love hearing your opinions, honestly) or don't post it!

Sidebar--I like your posts, Karen, what you say is typically thought-provoking and informative. Please stay in this. Thanks.

I'm posting in here as a distraction right now, so for whatever reason I'm back, for a bit at least....

Monarch, I didn't grow up well-to-do. I was raised by a single mom. In the 60's and 70's when it was still a bit scandalous for a woman to be divorced. I didn't attend an Ivy. But I HAD fab advantages, and I bet you did too, some of them, maybe even more than me.

I was white. I had a SOLID parent with some college, who read to me all the time and taught me how to read at 3. My dad's side of the family are almost all engineers, doctors and college profs, with a couple of professional pilots thrown in for good measure. All college educated to a high degree. (I consider myself "undereducated" compared to the rest of my dad's side of the family. ) So while in the strict economic sense, we may have been hovering at the lowest end of middle class, socially and mentally, the environment I was raised in was much higher. I observed my family and knew on some level that it was possible and expected that I would be successful. This mental state gave me enormous advantages and exposure to a side of life and a particular mindest, that many of my husband's kids simply do not have. It also ensured that I not truly identify with them, that I carry the attitudes of the class I perceive myself to be or that I aspire to.

See my next post for a better explanation of what I really meant by the lack of honest conversation, which has been so universally misinterpreted here, that I can only take full responsibility for that.

 

[ksinger]

Ksinger, I normally go around PS ditto-ing pretty much everything you typically say. But I have to disagree, strongly, with you here. I just do not understand how you can make such a bold statement on the socio-economic backgrounds of PSers. This is a diamond forum, and for that reason, most of us do not feel the need to tell-all about our lifestyle or childhood.

I for one came from EXACTLY that background that you've mentioned above. I put my self throught undergrad and then graduate school. I remember eating nothing but plain boiled pasta for MONTHS. I remember being kicked out of my house and not having anywhere to go. I remember sleeping on friend's couches for weeks because I didn't have the money to get my own place. I remember taking my teenage brother in and supporting him because he didn't have anywhere to go either. I worked bloody damn hard to get my education and to be where I am right now. So just because I have an interest in diamonds, can speak engligh (which, mind you, is NOT my first language) and am posting on my high speed digital cable, it does not mean I cannot comprehend what other families are going through. I truly don't think you're being fair to most of us. We may not have first hand experience that your husband has, but it doesn't mean we're apathetic about it.

The fact that there is always discussion on these topics here means that people care enough to want to contribute their opinions and thoughts. Not everyone knows how to solve the situation, but there is open dialogue.

Kama, I am not accusing anyone of anything. I know not everyone here is rich. But my supposed assumption of socioeconomic status (at least at the present time) of the posters here, is based on...the posters, as in the regulars here. The ones that post most often in topics such as these, are clearly educated (or in the process) beyond highschool, with one degree at least, and generally more. We have health policy experts, counselors, psychologists, doctors, lawyers, Wall Street types, managers, and IT people, to name but a few. I see little evidence of women or men posting here, who failed English, had 2 children by the time they were 17, dropped out of highschool, and are working for near minimum wage. I would wager that the makeup of this board is NOT a representative sample of the demographics of the US, let alone anywhere else. The concerns, discussions and attitudes I see on display all the time in these threads are not those of people who dragged themselves out of extreme poverty, in general. So I really don't think my going there is a stretch.

I am also in no way denigrating anyone's grit or determination to succeed. But I bet you most everyone here had reasonably stable parent(s), and/or parents who were very supportive or sacrificed to open opportunities for them. Haven is one. I am another. We had very little money and honestly hovered around being poor. But my single mother had a bit of college, was rock-solid stable mentally and emotionally, never abused drugs or alcohol, was continuously employed, and was determined I would be college educated and moved heaven and earth to get me the opportunity. With a different mother, I could easily have been very VERY different than I am now. I took advantage of what was offered yes, but the important part, is it was offered AND encouraged. If YOU are an example (read below) of "the little black kid that could,", then I applaud you - you are truly remarkable, but that isn't the experience of most in real poverty, which is not just lack of funds, but also a poverty of mind and spirit. And I cannot believe that it is the experience of most in this forum.
In any case, of all the people on here, I shouldn't have to point out to you that your personal experience does not constitute data. Maybe you and I and a few others beat the odds, but exceptions are just that: exceptions, they don't change the odds, they merely tend to skew our perception them. They are still the odds and the majority WILL fall to them unless there is some sort of intervention, be that parental pushing, a teacher, a social worker, or some event.

And to bolster my assumptions, how many threads have come and gone about schools: where I went/where I will be sending MY kids/where to buy a home to get my kids into the BEST publics. These are people who wouldn't be caught dead LIVING in parts of my husband's district, let alone sending their kids to his school. In public, they would say it was because the school is bad, in private, they would say they wouldn't live there because of the creeping level of poverty and crime in those areas, pure and simple. These are all the thoughts and concerns of people who are savvy and/or educated and dedicated to passing those traits on to their kids. They may be sacrificing now, but they have a plan, a goal, and an idea of how to get it. These are NOT the people or situations I'm talking about.

The kind of poverty I'm talking about is the grinding, endemic, generational kind. There IS a difference. That kind of poverty is very hard to break, and the vast majority of kids born into it can't do it alone.

When talking about schooling, I found this interesting bit this morning. This person (it's from a BLOG no less) makes the illogic of our attitudes about poverty and schooling, front and center far better than I can:

" THE PROBLEM" with education is not really education. It's social and economic injustice, largely manifested as poverty, segregation, racism, and classism. As my post on McWhorter shows, there are a large number of blacks entering the middle class who are now turning their backs on low-income blacks in ways that are savage and disturbing. It shows the extent to which money, power, and privilege can be horribly corrupting forces. (ed. comment: This turning away from the class you came from and identifying with the class you wish to be or SEE yourself as, I've read of before. I suspect it is generally true. I "felt" middle-class growing up, and perhaps from a social standpoint I was, but strictly speaking, economically, we likely were NOT. end ed. comment)
"THE PROBLEM" with education is symptomatic -- literally -- of the disease of social and economic injustice. But the climate in this country is overtly hostile to this idea. It's very easy to see why: social and economic injustice gets distorted into the conversation called "Poverty Is No Excuse." It then gets further distorted by saccharine anecdotes of "the little black kid that could," the kid who -- despite the odds -- managed to graduate suma cum laude from Harvard. If you counted these little bromides up, they'd probably number in the dozens. So there exist in the public discourse on education several dozen uplifting stories about poor kids with crack-addicted mothers that made it. The moral? If they could do it, any person could. The same Horatio Alger story is applied to schools, e.g., KIPP. It goes like this: KIPP schools can take poor black kids, raise their test scores, and get them into elite prep schools. Moral of the story? If they could do it, any school could.

What's wrong with this logic? This is -- IMHO -- the most important argument to make right now RE: "THE PROBLEM" with education.

As I have been trying to argue, successfully or not, the logic behind these feel-good stories is faulty. On the individual level, the logic is faulty because NOT everyone can grow up with a crack-addicted mother and graduate suma cum laude from Harvard. If they could, these kinds of stories would never be told. We don't tell stories about the little kid who drank orange juice and then played baseball. Why not? Because every little kid can drink orange juice and play baseball. This is an UNREMARKABLE story -- a banal, commonplace, everyday event. But the reason we tell stories about poor kids with crack-addicted mothers that make it is because they are so incredibly rare. We say, "Wow! Did you hear that story about the poor kid with the crack-addicted mother that became the president of General Motors??"

Yet, for some extraordinary reason, our brains freeze up when we hear these stories. Somehow, we are simultaneously -- and paradoxically -- aware that (1) this is very rare and yet (2) if he could do it, anyone can. This makes absolutely zero sense logically. But we are inherently sentimental beasts, we Americans. So we eat this stuff up because we are addicted to stories of inspiration. All we really want to do is feel good. Believing that this extraordinarily remarkable event is somehow reproducible may not make sense logically, but it makes us feel good to think that it might be possible. But feeling good is not the foundation on which public policy should be placed. (ed. comment: and THIS is why we cannot have the conversation! The honest national conversation. We are busy telling ourselves "little black kid that could," stories that make us feel good, rather than facing the gritty reality that most little black boys don't, and then we tell ourselves that teacher quality is THE determining factor in those kids success, not money, not environment, not gangs, just teachers. So we say abandon ship, which is great for the people saying it because they perceive that they at least, aren't on that ship and aren't at all responsible for the fact that it's sinking. There is the breakdown in the "honesty". end ed. comment). The same exact logic applies to "the little KIPP school that could." We see the story and say, "Wow! These black kids can do it. That must mean that every school and every poor black kid can do it!" But what does "do it" mean? In most cases of these feel-good stories, "do it" means higher test scores. In other words, the school is successful because it has raised test scores. This is the evidence that is presented as proof that it is successful. But higher test scores certainly does NOT mean better-educated kids. The Center on Education Policy released a report showing that non-tested subjects like art, music, and social studies are not being taught any more so schools -- including the little schools that could -- can focus exclusively on the subjects that are tested, i.e., reading and math. Translation? "Successful" schools are turning into test-prep factories.

KIPP counters this by showing that they offer a broad range of subjects -- including art, music, social studies -- and that their students are given opportunities to sing in the choir, play in the orchestra, etc. One would certainly expect that if kids spend from 7:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. during the week, four hours on Saturdays, and a month during the summer that they would be able to be exposed to a broad range of subjects. KIPP students put in roughly 70% more time in class than typical public school students.

So we say, "Hurray! Every school should be like KIPP!"

But as I've argued again and again, KIPP can't scale. Right now, there are 45 KIPP schools with 400 teachers serving over 9,000 students in 15 states and the District of Columbia. 9,000 students out of the total population of 54,593,000 students in all of public K-12 schools means that KIPP serves 0.00016486% of the population. And yet, 0.00016486% of students makes us stand up and say, "This should work for the remaining 99.999835% of students!"

The average KIPP teacher is in his/her early 20's, is single, and has no kids. They are clearly very dedicated young people who are not only willing to work longer hours and on Saturdays, but who are ABLE to work longer hours and on Saturdays. Teachers with families simply can't do this. They have to go home, fix dinner, do the dishes, walk the dog, and help with their kids' homework. (ed. comment: And let's do talk about the attrition rate of these superstars, shall we? end ed. comment)

Moreover, the "success" of KIPP is tarnished when you consider where the students come from. Interviews with KIPP teachers indicate that they refer mostly already high-achieving students to KIPP who come from intact families and whose parents are unusually involved in the school (Carnoy, M., Jacobsen, R., Mishel, L., & Rothstein, R. (2005). The charter school dust-up: Examining evidence on enrollment and achievement. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute and New York: Teachers College Press., p. 5.

So again - a TOTALLY remarkable, unique, unreproducible model is held up as the hope for all.

To achieve the tipping point, we have to trash the logic that underlies the "Poverty Is No Excuse" crap. Certainly some kids can pull themselves up out of the inner-city despite the tremendous odds. Certainly some great schools have formed and will continue to form in poor neighborhoods and attract motivated teachers, students, and parents to work together to improve the educational outcomes of poor kids. KIPP is a good example of this. But the dozens of examples of personal success pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of personal failures. The 45 KIPP schools make up a tiny fraction of the thousands and thousands of schools where children are ground up and spat out. So why do so many poor kids fail? Why are so many poor children chewed up and spat out?

Clearly, kids can't wait for us adults to figure things out. We obviously need to craft both short and long-term stategies. TFA, KIPP, etc. are short-term strategies. We have to get at the source of the problem if we are serious about leaving no child behind. "

So...I guess the moral of the story, is that, the current and popular war on teachers notwithstanding, the issues are deeper than can be addressed by schools, and back all the way to our blogging teacher, if her apparent gaff can start a truly clear-eyed and honest conversation about the ways in which we as a society are deluding ourselves about nature of the problem, and making teachers the scapegoats for all of society's ills, she will have done something that is desperately needed.

 

[ksinger]

If the ship is sinking, abandon it.

If it's a great, big, pricey ship that it's more effective to bail and patch than abandon and replace, I'm going to vote for rescuing it (the noble alternative of going down with the sinking ship has always struck me as inexpressibly silly). I had varied educational experiences growing up, myself: miserable public schools, miserable private schools that sank my folks into debt, city colleges, Ivy universities (as a student and a professor)- I'm like the Goldilocks of the educational system.

And, going off of those experiences? The institution doesn't matter, past a certain point (like, you know, it's nice to be able to afford enough chairs for everybody, and a nice metal detector or two if you need them). The teachers do matter. If we want to save the educational system, we need to raise the hiring standards (which probably means raising the salaries), give our hires the benefit of the doubt (no more silly mockable paint-by-the-numbers grading "comments," and much less in the way of rubrics), and do what we can do to keep the good teachers going instead of letting them get frustrated (or suspending them for nonsense "violations" while predators like the one SoCool mentions stay in the system).

Your AmeriCorp experience sounds immensely frustrating. Did it put you off the profession? I get the sense that you've transitioned to another field, and if that's the reason, I hope it won't come off as presumptuous if I chalk that up as another screw-up on the part of the existing system, and a loss to the field. We need talented, ambitious teachers, damnit!

You're exactly right, I chose not to continue in education because the system was just too broken. For me, it wasn't the students, though they were challenging, or the parents, though they were limited in many ways, but the teachers. Their negativity absolutely sapped me of any desire to work side-by-side with them.

I went on to lobby and am now a law student, hoping to continue in the industry I lobbied for. My law school is full of talented young people who did TFA or taught and gave up on it. I really don't think it's money that's keeping people out of the field, but rather the lack of respect, the risk of getting accused of inappropriate behavior (for men) and the frustrations of working with people who are attracted to the field as it is. Not to insult anyone on this board who is a teacher, but I am sure they are too aware teaching can attract people who are in it for the wrong reasons.

Well, believe me, you did. I relayed this to the hubs and I could barely see through the smoke in the room. He said if he came on to reply it would likely get ME booted off the board. Believe me, the contempt runs both ways. He sees people like YOU and the TFA crowd as the failures, as dilettantes who can't handle the real fire of the classroom, who flit in, see a tiny slice, get a speck of the dirt on them, and then flit out and speak disparagingly about how dirty THEY are. He said that clearly you missed the part that teachers are an overwhelmingly optimistic and idealistic group, and that venting enables them to continue slogging in the mud that is too much for you. And a large part of the problem is that the people who cannot deal with a classroom full of real flesh and blood kids, and the enormous stresses put on them by those kids and admin and society, if they don't bail completely, generally run to become admin, where their minimal experience with the classroom perpetuates the monumental stupidity of some of the "reforms' that are thown almost daily at the teachers.

 

[KimberlyH]

The idea that teachers ate all either saints or sinners aggitates me to no end. They're/We're human and some just plain suck and some are amazing and most fall in the middle. Same for this concept that there is a war on teachers, most people do not actively dislike teachers, some abhor them, some adore them most are politely respectful of the profession. Because this issue is so important and its effects are far reaching I wish more people were actively involved in finding solutions but I certainly never felt comparable to a warrior when I went to work.

 

[slg47]

My law school is full of talented young people who did TFA or taught and gave up on it. I really don't think it's money that's keeping people out of the field, but rather the lack of respect, the risk of getting accused of inappropriate behavior (for men) and the frustrations of working with people who are attracted to the field as it is. Not to insult anyone on this board who is a teacher, but I am sure they are too aware teaching can attract people who are in it for the wrong reasons.

I think it's important to find a field in which you can get along with your fellow coworkers . I don't think ksinger was trying to insult all teachers with this statement. The facts are that teachers make little money, have little to no respect, the bad ones get the same pay as the good ones, it is nearly impossible to fire the bad ones, and there is a lot of administrative BS. This would be frustrating for a lot of people. Wouldn't it frustrate you if you were working hard and your coworker ordered a pizza during class and sent a 12 year old outside with money to get it? (true story) Similarly other fields would frustrate other people (there is a reason I did not attend medical school!)

TFA: this is a terrible program at its core. The whole idea is that all you need to be a successful teacher and change kids lives is to be young and enthusiastic. That's simply not the case. Education is a rich field with literature and research just like many other fields, yet for some reason since we have all been students we think it is easy to be teachers.

 

[suchende]

My law school is full of talented young people who did TFA or taught and gave up on it. I really don't think it's money that's keeping people out of the field, but rather the lack of respect, the risk of getting accused of inappropriate behavior (for men) and the frustrations of working with people who are attracted to the field as it is. Not to insult anyone on this board who is a teacher, but I am sure they are too aware teaching can attract people who are in it for the wrong reasons.

I think it's important to find a field in which you can get along with your fellow coworkers . I don't think ksinger was trying to insult all teachers with this statement. The facts are that teachers make little money, have little to no respect, the bad ones get the same pay as the good ones, it is nearly impossible to fire the bad ones, and there is a lot of administrative BS. This would be frustrating for a lot of people. Wouldn't it frustrate you if you were working hard and your coworker ordered a pizza during class and sent a 12 year old outside with money to get it? (true story) Similarly other fields would frustrate other people (there is a reason I did not attend medical school!)

TFA: this is a terrible program at its core. The whole idea is that all you need to be a successful teacher and change kids lives is to be young and enthusiastic. That's simply not the case. Education is a rich field with literature and research just like many other fields, yet for some reason since we have all been students we think it is easy to be teachers.

I don't think she was either, and neither was I, those are just some of the challenges of recruiting and retaining talent.

Any criticism of TFA/AmeriCorps that you could lay down, I would probably agree with. Though I do value that the program questions the status quo.

 

[movie zombie]

ksinger, i want to tell you how much i appreciated your articulation re the problem with education......and i agree with you completely. i grew up working class poor and had disadvantages but nothing like grinding poverty.

education is the scapegoat.

MoZo

 

[Tacori E-ring]

As a parent, I don't know how those comments are appropriate. Here's the thing, the blog had her PICTURE. Hardly trying to keep her anonymity. The blog was trouble from the get go. Should she be able to have her thoughts about her students? Of course! But as soon as you write something on the internet, for everyone to see, you have to be held accountable. If I had a blog complaining about patients, I should be held accountable. That is unethical. Keeping private thoughts private is part of being a mature adult.

Now what this thread has seem to turn into is similar to what is discussed in my Multicultural class. There is no invisible veil when it comes to age, gender, race, ethnic background, sexual orientation, ses, nationality, or religion. Racism is alive and well. Last class we talked about "white privilege." Something I doubt most of us think of. It will be interesting to see what happens in 2040-2050 when we become a minority (in the US). Will power be passed along or not? Seems like a whole other thread.

 

[suchende]

ksinger, I don't blame you for being angry at people like me. I totally agree that TFA/people like me are deserving of criticism. That doesn't mean we should be muzzled from an "honest dialogue" just because we couldn't handle it. We have something to contribute by having an outside perspective, and as much of an interest in meaningful change as anyone.

 

[junebug17]

I feel as if we are talking about two separate issues in this thread.

Ksinger, IMO, teachers like your husband are the true heroes, not this woman who's saying crummy things about her students. I have nothing but admiration for teachers who work in poverty-stricken, crime- ridden environments. I live 25 minutes away from one of the most dangerous cities in America. Might as well be 25,0000 minutes. It's a war-zone. In all honesty, I can't imagine teaching there. Trying to teach kids in a place where the sound of gunshots is commonplace? Kids being raised in urban areas have so many things going against them, it's just not fair to blame teachers for their poor performance. but apparently they are, and I can certainly understand your husband's frustration.

But I just don't see how this really relates to this situation. Please bear with me, I don't know much about this, and I might be missing something. But I think this teacher teaches in a middle class area? If so, she's not facing the challenges your husband faces. I just don't see how her quips demonstrate the plight of the American education system. Ok, so some of her students bug her. She's dealing with teen-agers, and sometimes they can be pains in the butt. I should know, I've raised two of them. I just don't see how comments like "I hear the trash company is hiring", "although academically ok, your child has no other redeeming qualities" and "there's no other way to say this, I hate your kid" are very constructive, or make this woman a "posterboy" for the ills of the public school system. Sounds to me like she just doesn't have the patience to handle people going through adolescence. Oh, and by the way, I don't believe she was speaking in generalities. I think she had specific kids in mind. Again, I sympathize to an extent, I can see where working with teen-agers can be very trying but I don't think her attitude towards some of her students is a very productive one.

Should she be fired over her comments? Not sure. IMO she certainly showed bad judgement. I can't help but think my husband would be fired for bad-mouthing customers. Everyone vents about their job from time to time, but she should have realized there was a good chance this method of venting wouldn't remain private.

 

[zoebartlett]

The idea that teachers ate all either saints or sinners aggitates me to no end. They're/We're human and some just plain suck and some are amazing and most fall in the middle. Same for this concept that there is a war on teachers, most people do not actively dislike teachers, some abhor them, some adore them most are politely respectful of the profession. Because this issue is so important and its effects are far reaching I wish more people were actively involved in finding solutions but I certainly never felt comparable to a warrior when I went to work.

Well said and I agree, Kimberly. I've never felt comparable to a warrior either.

 

[CNOS128]

KSinger, this is not legal advice, but you should attribute your long block quote to the author who actually wrote it, instead of citing "this person." And you might consider asking permission to re-post "this person's" intellectual property.

As for the content: yes, poverty is a huge problem that interferes with students receiving a good education. But it is not the only problem. There are plenty of middle-class kids being crappily educated, for a number of reasons other than poverty or lack of parental involvement.

 

[Karl_K]

I have been reading this thread with interest and not sure I should comment but here goes:
A teacher commenting in public about her students is in my opinion out of line.
I view it the same way as a doctor discussing his/her patients in public.

While this thread has been going on a friend has had a bunch of meetings with teachers about their child not doing well in school. A comment was made that the teachers were responsible for the child not doing well.
I pissed them off when I said educating your child is your responsibility not the schools, how many hours a night do you work with the child... the answer a big 0! not even making sure the homework gets done.
The excuse it is to big of a hassle to get the child to do it. My comment was: if you cant get your child to do it how do you expect a teacher to get the child to do it? They got pissed and hung up at that point.
No wonder the child is not doing well in school, it has to start at home.
My mom and sometimes my dad spent hours and hours helping me with my homework through about 4th grade which is when I hit stride with an awesome teacher and didn't need much help.
I never would have reached that point without my parents help.

 

[HollyS]

Ksinger, I normally go around PS ditto-ing pretty much everything you typically say. But I have to disagree, strongly, with you here. I just do not understand how you can make such a bold statement on the socio-economic backgrounds of PSers. This is a diamond forum, and for that reason, most of us do not feel the need to tell-all about our lifestyle or childhood.

I for one came from EXACTLY that background that you've mentioned above. I put my self throught undergrad and then graduate school. I remember eating nothing but plain boiled pasta for MONTHS. I remember being kicked out of my house and not having anywhere to go. I remember sleeping on friend's couches for weeks because I didn't have the money to get my own place. I remember taking my teenage brother in and supporting him because he didn't have anywhere to go either. I worked bloody damn hard to get my education and to be where I am right now. So just because I have an interest in diamonds, can speak engligh (which, mind you, is NOT my first language) and am posting on my high speed digital cable, it does not mean I cannot comprehend what other families are going through. I truly don't think you're being fair to most of us. We may not have first hand experience that your husband has, but it doesn't mean we're apathetic about it.

The fact that there is always discussion on these topics here means that people care enough to want to contribute their opinions and thoughts. Not everyone knows how to solve the situation, but there is open dialogue.

Kama, I am not accusing anyone of anything. I know not everyone here is rich. But my supposed assumption of socioeconomic status (at least at the present time) of the posters here, is based on...the posters, as in the regulars here. The ones that post most often in topics such as these, are clearly educated (or in the process) beyond highschool, with one degree at least, and generally more. We have health policy experts, counselors, psychologists, doctors, lawyers, Wall Street types, managers, and IT people, to name but a few. I see little evidence of women or men posting here, who failed English, had 2 children by the time they were 17, dropped out of highschool, and are working for near minimum wage. I would wager that the makeup of this board is NOT a representative sample of the demographics of the US, let alone anywhere else. The concerns, discussions and attitudes I see on display all the time in these threads are not those of people who dragged themselves out of extreme poverty, in general. So I really don't think my going there is a stretch.

I am also in no way denigrating anyone's grit or determination to succeed. But I bet you most everyone here had reasonably stable parent(s), and/or parents who were very supportive or sacrificed to open opportunities for them. Haven is one. I am another. We had very little money and honestly hovered around being poor. But my single mother had a bit of college, was rock-solid stable mentally and emotionally, never abused drugs or alcohol, was continuously employed, and was determined I would be college educated and moved heaven and earth to get me the opportunity. With a different mother, I could easily have been very VERY different than I am now. I took advantage of what was offered yes, but the important part, is it was offered AND encouraged. If YOU are an example (read below) of "the little black kid that could,", then I applaud you - you are truly remarkable, but that isn't the experience of most in real poverty, which is not just lack of funds, but also a poverty of mind and spirit. And I cannot believe that it is the experience of most in this forum.
In any case, of all the people on here, I shouldn't have to point out to you that your personal experience does not constitute data. Maybe you and I and a few others beat the odds, but exceptions are just that: exceptions, they don't change the odds, they merely tend to skew our perception them. They are still the odds and the majority WILL fall to them unless there is some sort of intervention, be that parental pushing, a teacher, a social worker, or some event.

And to bolster my assumptions, how many threads have come and gone about schools: where I went/where I will be sending MY kids/where to buy a home to get my kids into the BEST publics. These are people who wouldn't be caught dead LIVING in parts of my husband's district, let alone sending their kids to his school. In public, they would say it was because the school is bad, in private, they would say they wouldn't live there because of the creeping level of poverty and crime in those areas, pure and simple. These are all the thoughts and concerns of people who are savvy and/or educated and dedicated to passing those traits on to their kids. They may be sacrificing now, but they have a plan, a goal, and an idea of how to get it. These are NOT the people or situations I'm talking about.

The kind of poverty I'm talking about is the grinding, endemic, generational kind. There IS a difference. That kind of poverty is very hard to break, and the vast majority of kids born into it can't do it alone.

When talking about schooling, I found this interesting bit this morning. This person (it's from a BLOG no less) makes the illogic of our attitudes about poverty and schooling, front and center far better than I can:

" THE PROBLEM" with education is not really education. It's social and economic injustice, largely manifested as poverty, segregation, racism, and classism. As my post on McWhorter shows, there are a large number of blacks entering the middle class who are now turning their backs on low-income blacks in ways that are savage and disturbing. It shows the extent to which money, power, and privilege can be horribly corrupting forces. (ed. comment: This turning away from the class you came from and identifying with the class you wish to be or SEE yourself as, I've read of before. I suspect it is generally true. I "felt" middle-class growing up, and perhaps from a social standpoint I was, but strictly speaking, economically, we likely were NOT. end ed. comment)
"THE PROBLEM" with education is symptomatic -- literally -- of the disease of social and economic injustice. But the climate in this country is overtly hostile to this idea. It's very easy to see why: social and economic injustice gets distorted into the conversation called "Poverty Is No Excuse." It then gets further distorted by saccharine anecdotes of "the little black kid that could," the kid who -- despite the odds -- managed to graduate suma cum laude from Harvard. If you counted these little bromides up, they'd probably number in the dozens. So there exist in the public discourse on education several dozen uplifting stories about poor kids with crack-addicted mothers that made it. The moral? If they could do it, any person could. The same Horatio Alger story is applied to schools, e.g., KIPP. It goes like this: KIPP schools can take poor black kids, raise their test scores, and get them into elite prep schools. Moral of the story? If they could do it, any school could.

What's wrong with this logic? This is -- IMHO -- the most important argument to make right now RE: "THE PROBLEM" with education.

As I have been trying to argue, successfully or not, the logic behind these feel-good stories is faulty. On the individual level, the logic is faulty because NOT everyone can grow up with a crack-addicted mother and graduate suma cum laude from Harvard. If they could, these kinds of stories would never be told. We don't tell stories about the little kid who drank orange juice and then played baseball. Why not? Because every little kid can drink orange juice and play baseball. This is an UNREMARKABLE story -- a banal, commonplace, everyday event. But the reason we tell stories about poor kids with crack-addicted mothers that make it is because they are so incredibly rare. We say, "Wow! Did you hear that story about the poor kid with the crack-addicted mother that became the president of General Motors??"

Yet, for some extraordinary reason, our brains freeze up when we hear these stories. Somehow, we are simultaneously -- and paradoxically -- aware that (1) this is very rare and yet (2) if he could do it, anyone can. This makes absolutely zero sense logically. But we are inherently sentimental beasts, we Americans. So we eat this stuff up because we are addicted to stories of inspiration. All we really want to do is feel good. Believing that this extraordinarily remarkable event is somehow reproducible may not make sense logically, but it makes us feel good to think that it might be possible. But feeling good is not the foundation on which public policy should be placed. (ed. comment: and THIS is why we cannot have the conversation! The honest national conversation. We are busy telling ourselves "little black kid that could," stories that make us feel good, rather than facing the gritty reality that most little black boys don't, and then we tell ourselves that teacher quality is THE determining factor in those kids success, not money, not environment, not gangs, just teachers. So we say abandon ship, which is great for the people saying it because they perceive that they at least, aren't on that ship and aren't at all responsible for the fact that it's sinking. There is the breakdown in the "honesty". end ed. comment). The same exact logic applies to "the little KIPP school that could." We see the story and say, "Wow! These black kids can do it. That must mean that every school and every poor black kid can do it!" But what does "do it" mean? In most cases of these feel-good stories, "do it" means higher test scores. In other words, the school is successful because it has raised test scores. This is the evidence that is presented as proof that it is successful. But higher test scores certainly does NOT mean better-educated kids. The Center on Education Policy released a report showing that non-tested subjects like art, music, and social studies are not being taught any more so schools -- including the little schools that could -- can focus exclusively on the subjects that are tested, i.e., reading and math. Translation? "Successful" schools are turning into test-prep factories.

KIPP counters this by showing that they offer a broad range of subjects -- including art, music, social studies -- and that their students are given opportunities to sing in the choir, play in the orchestra, etc. One would certainly expect that if kids spend from 7:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. during the week, four hours on Saturdays, and a month during the summer that they would be able to be exposed to a broad range of subjects. KIPP students put in roughly 70% more time in class than typical public school students.

So we say, "Hurray! Every school should be like KIPP!"

But as I've argued again and again, KIPP can't scale. Right now, there are 45 KIPP schools with 400 teachers serving over 9,000 students in 15 states and the District of Columbia. 9,000 students out of the total population of 54,593,000 students in all of public K-12 schools means that KIPP serves 0.00016486% of the population. And yet, 0.00016486% of students makes us stand up and say, "This should work for the remaining 99.999835% of students!"

The average KIPP teacher is in his/her early 20's, is single, and has no kids. They are clearly very dedicated young people who are not only willing to work longer hours and on Saturdays, but who are ABLE to work longer hours and on Saturdays. Teachers with families simply can't do this. They have to go home, fix dinner, do the dishes, walk the dog, and help with their kids' homework. (ed. comment: And let's do talk about the attrition rate of these superstars, shall we? end ed. comment)

Moreover, the "success" of KIPP is tarnished when you consider where the students come from. Interviews with KIPP teachers indicate that they refer mostly already high-achieving students to KIPP who come from intact families and whose parents are unusually involved in the school (Carnoy, M., Jacobsen, R., Mishel, L., & Rothstein, R. (2005). The charter school dust-up: Examining evidence on enrollment and achievement. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute and New York: Teachers College Press., p. 5.

So again - a TOTALLY remarkable, unique, unreproducible model is held up as the hope for all.

To achieve the tipping point, we have to trash the logic that underlies the "Poverty Is No Excuse" crap. Certainly some kids can pull themselves up out of the inner-city despite the tremendous odds. Certainly some great schools have formed and will continue to form in poor neighborhoods and attract motivated teachers, students, and parents to work together to improve the educational outcomes of poor kids. KIPP is a good example of this. But the dozens of examples of personal success pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of personal failures. The 45 KIPP schools make up a tiny fraction of the thousands and thousands of schools where children are ground up and spat out. So why do so many poor kids fail? Why are so many poor children chewed up and spat out?

Clearly, kids can't wait for us adults to figure things out. We obviously need to craft both short and long-term stategies. TFA, KIPP, etc. are short-term strategies. We have to get at the source of the problem if we are serious about leaving no child behind. "

So...I guess the moral of the story, is that, the current and popular war on teachers notwithstanding, the issues are deeper than can be addressed by schools, and back all the way to our blogging teacher, if her apparent gaff can start a truly clear-eyed and honest conversation about the ways in which we as a society are deluding ourselves about nature of the problem, and making teachers the scapegoats for all of society's ills, she will have done something that is desperately needed.

My own post was a bit tongue-in-cheek, with some salient points, but THIS is exactly the truth. I agree.

 

[ksinger]

Point taken and thank you TheBigT. I do usually attribute, link, and excerpt, not post entire entries or articles. I'm not sure where my head was.

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2006/06/poverty-is-no-excuse-is-no-excuse.html

For any who are interested, this blog has LOT of stuff. I've only read a very few of the oodles of entries. I found it when I was looking for TFA attrition stats, which are pretty stunning, actually. But then I suppose TFA never intended to actually create real classroom teachers, as evidenced in this piece, complete with links to outside sources.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/teachers/a-new-look-at-teach-for-americ.html

which has the following link to an extremely interesting report on the actual effectiveness of TFA (their claims are exaggerated to say the least), and what is it REALLY being used for.

http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/Policy_Briefs/Heilig_TeachForAmerica.pdf

 

[qtiekiki]

I feel as if we are talking about two separate issues in this thread.

Ksinger, IMO, teachers like your husband are the true heroes, not this woman who's saying crummy things about her students. I have nothing but admiration for teachers who work in poverty-stricken, crime- ridden environments. I live 25 minutes away from one of the most dangerous cities in America. Might as well be 25,0000 minutes. It's a war-zone. In all honesty, I can't imagine teaching there. Trying to teach kids in a place where the sound of gunshots is commonplace? Kids being raised in urban areas have so many things going against them, it's just not fair to blame teachers for their poor performance. but apparently they are, and I can certainly understand your husband's frustration.

But I just don't see how this really relates to this situation. Please bear with me, I don't know much about this, and I might be missing something. But I think this teacher teaches in a middle class area? If so, she's not facing the challenges your husband faces. I just don't see how her quips demonstrate the plight of the American education system. Ok, so some of her students bug her. She's dealing with teen-agers, and sometimes they can be pains in the butt. I should know, I've raised two of them. I just don't see how comments like "I hear the trash company is hiring", "although academically ok, your child has no other redeeming qualities" and "there's no other way to say this, I hate your kid" are very constructive, or make this woman a "posterboy" for the ills of the public school system. Sounds to me like she just doesn't have the patience to handle people going through adolescence. Oh, and by the way, I don't believe she was speaking in generalities. I think she had specific kids in mind. Again, I sympathize to an extent, I can see where working with teen-agers can be very trying but I don't think her attitude towards some of her students is a very productive one.

Should she be fired over her comments? Not sure. IMO she certainly showed bad judgement. I can't help but think my husband would be fired for bad-mouthing customers. Everyone vents about their job from time to time, but she should have realized there was a good chance this method of venting wouldn't remain private.

Well said. I completely agree with this.

Ksinger - I understand and agree with what you are saying about our education system. I just don't think the blog of this particular teacher illustrates the same issues and frustrations with the system, and therefore this thread didn't lead to the conversation that you had in mind.

I also think the teacher shows poor judgement with the blog, and I would lose respect of her if I was one of the parent. I mean what kind of lessons are getting across to the kid. What happened to "to get respect, you got to give respect" and "treating people as you would like to be treated"? That's what her comments make me think about, not about the education system.

 

[ksinger]

I feel as if we are talking about two separate issues in this thread.

Ksinger, IMO, teachers like your husband are the true heroes, not this woman who's saying crummy things about her students. I have nothing but admiration for teachers who work in poverty-stricken, crime- ridden environments. I live 25 minutes away from one of the most dangerous cities in America. Might as well be 25,0000 minutes. It's a war-zone. In all honesty, I can't imagine teaching there. Trying to teach kids in a place where the sound of gunshots is commonplace? Kids being raised in urban areas have so many things going against them, it's just not fair to blame teachers for their poor performance. but apparently they are, and I can certainly understand your husband's frustration.

But I just don't see how this really relates to this situation. Please bear with me, I don't know much about this, and I might be missing something. But I think this teacher teaches in a middle class area? If so, she's not facing the challenges your husband faces. I just don't see how her quips demonstrate the plight of the American education system. Ok, so some of her students bug her. She's dealing with teen-agers, and sometimes they can be pains in the butt. I should know, I've raised two of them. I just don't see how comments like "I hear the trash company is hiring", "although academically ok, your child has no other redeeming qualities" and "there's no other way to say this, I hate your kid" are very constructive, or make this woman a "posterboy" for the ills of the public school system. Sounds to me like she just doesn't have the patience to handle people going through adolescence. Oh, and by the way, I don't believe she was speaking in generalities. I think she had specific kids in mind. Again, I sympathize to an extent, I can see where working with teen-agers can be very trying but I don't think her attitude towards some of her students is a very productive one.

Should she be fired over her comments? Not sure. IMO she certainly showed bad judgement. I can't help but think my husband would be fired for bad-mouthing customers. Everyone vents about their job from time to time, but she should have realized there was a good chance this method of venting wouldn't remain private.

Well said. I completely agree with this.

Ksinger - I understand and agree with what you are saying about our education system. I just don't think the blog of this particular teacher illustrates the same issues and frustrations with the system, and therefore this thread didn't lead to the conversation that you had in mind.

I also think the teacher shows poor judgement with the blog, and I would lose respect of her if I was one of the parent. I mean what kind of lessons are getting across to the kid. What happened to "to get respect, you got to give respect" and "treating people as you would like to be treated"? That's what her comments make me think about, not about the education system.

Junebug - apparently I'm just flat out not coherent these days, and for that I apologize. This impetus behind this thread was less her original comments - which I neither condoned nor condemned, but her coming back and saying that if her words could cause a true discussion of the issues facing teachers, then all the brouhaha might have a silver lining. That was the "conversation" I was talking about, not whether she was wise/unwise, legal/illegal. I will say this though, I doubt she HATES kids or even dislikes them, anymore than parents hate their children one those occasions when they would love to flush them down the toilet. And don't deny this parents, you know there were/are times... My mother used to say "I'm going to beat you black and blue!", which I'm sure will cause some here to get their hackles up, but she knew and I certainly knew, that that phrase merely meant she was very annoyed with me and I was in big trouble. DID she beat me? Perish the thought! Did she hate me? Uh..NO. Did I learn some cosmic and BAD "lesson" from what she said? Don't think so. I do have a good understanding of the word "hyperbole" though, so I guess that's good...

My husband is not a hero, believe me. But he is damn tough, and he IS a wildly intelligent man with a passion for his subject and a burning desire to pass that passion on to his students. And in my opinion, he has hard-earned his stripes, which is why I get so upset when I see contempt for teachers show up here. Teachers are just the latest target of our stubbornly recurring human desire to project a madonna/whore complex onto SOMEONE. I find it tiresome.

qtiekiki, yes there are two discussions going on here, and for that I apologize for not being clearer in my intent. I do tend to see issues such as this in a larger context, and I should have made it more clear that that was my perspective. Although if I've learned anything over the years here, it's that these threads go where they will, where they are most interesting and meaty, and that may not be what the OP intended. They are like real conversations in that regard.

 

[ksinger]

And on a much less theoretical note, this just this morning from a FB acquaintance. Some here might say she's just one of those whiney, negative teachers who are part of the problem, but this sort of heartache and trying to keep a stiff upper lip breaks my heart.

" This has been a sad week in wisconsin for all state workers but most sad for me has been trying to be a positive teacher in front of students who have chosen the teaching profession. I'm exhausted and still find that there is no rainbow in sight."

 

[junebug17]

Oh, ok, I understand what you're saying ksinger...I guess the issue of whether this teacher should be fired is a hot topic, and does lend itself to some debate, so that's what people have focused on.

And I hear ya about teens...I love my daughter more than my own life, but she was a pip as a teen-ager...if she drove her own mother a bit crazy, I can see where she could have rubbed her teachers the wrong way.

 

[makemepretty]

There have been a couple of cases where students have gotten in trouble for saying not so nice things about their teachers on Facebook so it should work the other way too. I don't think she should be fired but she should be reprimanded and apologize to her students and their families. It's one thing if you tell someone close to you, venting...it's another thing to post it on the internet. She was wrong, period. Name calling isn't really very mature and as a teacher, I would just expect better manners than her students.

 

[merrijoy]

There have been a couple of cases where students have gotten in trouble for saying not so nice things about their teachers on Facebook so it should work the other way too. I don't think she should be fired but she should be reprimanded and apologize to her students and their families. It's one thing if you tell someone close to you, venting...it's another thing to post it on the internet. She was wrong, period. Name calling isn't really very mature and as a teacher, I would just expect better manners than her students.

Great post. This perfectly sums it up.

 

[swimmer]

There have been a couple of cases where students have gotten in trouble for saying not so nice things about their teachers on Facebook so it should work the other way too. I don't think she should be fired but she should be reprimanded and apologize to her students and their families. It's one thing if you tell someone close to you, venting...it's another thing to post it on the internet. She was wrong, period. Name calling isn't really very mature and as a teacher, I would just expect better manners than her students.

Great post. This perfectly sums it up.

Well I'm late to this maelstrom, but wanted to add that the first bit is inaccurate. Two teens were in legal trouble for creating fake FB profiles for their principals and including slanderous items (interests: pedophilia) while maintaining the fb pages as though they were their principal. Only one student was permitted by the courts to be suspended for creating a distraction from learning. In fact, one student who made a page on fb that called her teacher "the worst teacher ever" is now poised to sue the principal who briefly suspended her as punishment. The student's freedom of speech was being curtailed when she was suspended. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/education/16student.html. So, quite frankly, no. Teachers can be called names by students, parents, the community, heck even the Gov of Wisconsin, but it is in very very poor taste to lie down with dogs, so no, the teacher should have kept her (hilarious) comments to herself. Teachers vent to each other to keep sane, we love the job, we get to vent about it or go around the bend.

Yup, you have to know me really really well to hear the hilarious things that happen in my classroom

Hugs Ksinger and thank you for the TFA links. The program has always boggled my mind, I had not realized that so few made it through. I have yet to see any research into the students' responses to rich white kids descending for a brief stay...I only lasted a few years teaching in the inner-city before the toll of deportations, pregnancies, deaths, lack of supplies, and zero leadership from the good old boys who were appointed principals (all former businessmen) pushed me in a new direction.

 

[swimmer]

I just need to clear up exactly what "tenure" is...just to get this off my chest. If a teacher sexually abuses or rapes a student, tenure does not protect them, they go to jail. Some of the stuff I read on here was just nuts. Tenure is protection from being fired for any little thing and is earned after the teacher has been evaluated more than a dozen times in his or her first three years. During those first years a teacher can be fired for anything, homosexuality, being ugly, having an accent, you name it, they can be fired. Yes, I know of a principal who didn't like a teacher's nose ring, she was not given tenure, which means she was fired. Out. Done. Don't come back in August.

In "the real world" I know that there are all sorts of rules about firing and how that can and cannot be done and there are many protections that kick in pretty quickly after being hired. Of course I am talking about salaried employees; I am not comparing teaching to waitressing or unskilled manual labor where no, there are few to no protections. Teachers unionized to protect ourselves against the vagaries of leaders who rarely have as much education as we do, pervasive gender discrimination that holds teaching is the women's work and we can all just live off of our husbands' salaries, and of course the occasional witch hunts that course through our culture. Tenure protects good teachers and bad, yup, I've seen it cut both ways, but without it I'd wager there would be less creativity, fewer of us would risk ourselves by taking kids on overnight field trips, study abroad, heart to heart conversations about the deep questions in life, ie all the really meaningful and teachable moments that made us want to take on this rather thankless job. Ultimately we would spend as much time as business does in CYA instead of focusing on what really matters; getting the most effort out of students and the most love of learning into them.

I do not want to teach or be in a school that works like a business. Anyone who does has been under a rock for 4+ years. BTW, teachers pay 11% or more based on their state into their pension plans every year, that is right, we fund them. Just because the states chose to not bank that money and instead put it into failed real estate deals does not mean that they get to now "trim the fat" and deny us the pensions that we paid into (and had no choice in paying into, we just start paying into it on the first paycheck). Trust me, 11% of a first year's teaching salary is a small amount, but a big chunk of cash to that young person. Most of us will pay many times more into it than we can hope to get out (by my calculations I will need to live to be 107 to break even based on my own situation). So, yes, I feel badly for those who have been hurt by the economic downturn, but I just don't get why the national sentiment is to punish teachers. We are also humans; schools did not reap the benefits in the boom times, but they are the only thing that will get us out of desperate times.

 

[Maria D]

Great post, Swimmer. In my opinion, as a teacher in the same public high school that my own child attends, it's not tenure that's to blame for keeping crappy teachers in the system and for the problems of public education in general. It's a variety of things starting with administrators who take the path of least resistance. Within our union contract there are specific protocols for dealing with the performance issues of tenured teachers but I rarely see them followed. Instead, poor teachers at my school are given sections with low-ability kids or kids from families whose parents are least likely to complain. Our pension system is a problem as well. Maine public employees do not contribute to Social Security, but to our own retirement system. If we have any social security benefits coming to us from contributions from a prior or future job, they will be reduced under the "Windfall Elimination Provision." This includes any SS benefits we have coming to us through our spouses. This severely limits any incentive a long-time teacher who may be burned out has to consider a career change.

What is interesting to me about this particular English teacher in this particular affluent community is that she did not, on the whole, have the problems of poverty to deal with and yet she still had much to complain about. The problem with education in this country is not limited to the kinds of problems that ksinger's husband deals with. Even our "good" schools in "good" communities are sinking! I think she was way out of line to publish what she did on her blog. It was not anonymous; she had her first name, last initial and a picture, for goodness sake. I feel that unless you are paid to have an opinion, you shouldn't be writing it up for all the world to see (unless it *is* truly anonymous or private) no matter what your job is. But, I can completely relate to this woman's frustrations! When you are trying to teach kids who are *not* suffering from poverty or coming from cultures that do not value education, it is maddening to deal with the apathy and indifference to learning of MANY of your students. Indifferent to learning, but not to getting a high grade!

 

[ksinger]

I just need to clear up exactly what "tenure" is...just to get this off my chest. If a teacher sexually abuses or rapes a student, tenure does not protect them, they go to jail. Some of the stuff I read on here was just nuts. Tenure is protection from being fired for any little thing and is earned after the teacher has been evaluated more than a dozen times in his or her first three years. During those first years a teacher can be fired for anything, homosexuality, being ugly, having an accent, you name it, they can be fired. Yes, I know of a principal who didn't like a teacher's nose ring, she was not given tenure, which means she was fired. Out. Done. Don't come back in August.

In "the real world" I know that there are all sorts of rules about firing and how that can and cannot be done and there are many protections that kick in pretty quickly after being hired. Of course I am talking about salaried employees; I am not comparing teaching to waitressing or unskilled manual labor where no, there are few to no protections. Teachers unionized to protect ourselves against the vagaries of leaders who rarely have as much education as we do, pervasive gender discrimination that holds teaching is the women's work and we can all just live off of our husbands' salaries, and of course the occasional witch hunts that course through our culture. Tenure protects good teachers and bad, yup, I've seen it cut both ways, but without it I'd wager there would be less creativity, fewer of us would risk ourselves by taking kids on overnight field trips, study abroad, heart to heart conversations about the deep questions in life, ie all the really meaningful and teachable moments that made us want to take on this rather thankless job. Ultimately we would spend as much time as business does in CYA instead of focusing on what really matters; getting the most effort out of students and the most love of learning into them.

I do not want to teach or be in a school that works like a business. Anyone who does has been under a rock for 4+ years. BTW, teachers pay 11% or more based on their state into their pension plans every year, that is right, we fund them. Just because the states chose to not bank that money and instead put it into failed real estate deals does not mean that they get to now "trim the fat" and deny us the pensions that we paid into (and had no choice in paying into, we just start paying into it on the first paycheck). Trust me, 11% of a first year's teaching salary is a small amount, but a big chunk of cash to that young person. Most of us will pay many times more into it than we can hope to get out (by my calculations I will need to live to be 107 to break even based on my own situation). So, yes, I feel badly for those who have been hurt by the economic downturn, but I just don't get why the national sentiment is to punish teachers. We are also humans; schools did not reap the benefits in the boom times, but they are the only thing that will get us out of desperate times.

I really do appreciate you Swimmer. You are far more eloquent, pithy, and rational than I could ever be. I always appreciate the support and understanding of the genuine teachers on this board, since I can more easily be dismissed as the mere ranting wife of a teacher.

 

[makemepretty]

Swimmer, in my small town, a minimum of 3 students were required to stay home a day because of posting a rude thing about their teacher on Facebook. Just because it wasn't on the news, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Not only were they required to stay home for a day but they also had to apologize in writing and in person to the teacher. This is a public school in a small town. While I felt it was ridiculous thing to punish students for something that was done on their personal time,on their personal Facebook pages and not in school or on school property, it did become a learning experience-what you post on the internet is public, even if you try to keep it private. So, with that being the point, the teacher should be held to the same standards, if not higher, than immature children IMHO.

 

[dragonfly411]

I have been reading this thread with interest and not sure I should comment but here goes:
A teacher commenting in public about her students is in my opinion out of line.
I view it the same way as a doctor discussing his/her patients in public.

While this thread has been going on a friend has had a bunch of meetings with teachers about their child not doing well in school. A comment was made that the teachers were responsible for the child not doing well.
I pissed them off when I said educating your child is your responsibility not the schools, how many hours a night do you work with the child... the answer a big 0! not even making sure the homework gets done.
The excuse it is to big of a hassle to get the child to do it. My comment was: if you cant get your child to do it how do you expect a teacher to get the child to do it? They got pissed and hung up at that point.
No wonder the child is not doing well in school, it has to start at home.
My mom and sometimes my dad spent hours and hours helping me with my homework through about 4th grade which is when I hit stride with an awesome teacher and didn't need much help.
I never would have reached that point without my parents help.

Karl this post sums up many of my thoughts.

In relation to this particular teacher, I think it was unwise of her to post things about students. I think that it is one thing to blog about the problems she sees in the educational system, or a majority issue with dealing with students, but to post about individual issues is a bit unfair. I don't think she should be fired, but she should retract the individual complaints, or remove the blog and rethink her writing.

Blogs have opened up an interesting world for us. We can write about nearly anything and do pretty well if we try hard enough. There is though, a rather fuzzy veil of what is ok and what is not ok to post on blogs. Some people can step on lines and toes and do just fine. A blog on horses comes to mind in which the writer outs abusive owners, bad breeders, and bad horsemanship practices. The people she outs usually end up facing legal charges, or they try to slap her with some but they have yet to get a case. It's interesting to see things like that. I can see where the lines of appropriate and inappropriate can blur.

In regards to education. I think that the poverty issue ties in somewhat with the lack of education at home. Poverty stricken families tend to be lesser educated to start with, and are more worried about where their meals will come from than getting into college. Of course those families are going to spend less time helping their kids study, they have to maintain jobs to make sure they all eat at night, and they aren't able to remember many of the materials themselves. At the same time, there are problems within the educational system itself as well that I continually see that I think contribute. I feel like it isn't the teacher's FAULT per say, considering they are being given a structure to meet, standards to meet, test rules to follow and they are being taught by teachers before them. I feel like we've swayed somehow from really educating, and are merely preparing kids for tests and then moving on. I see it time and again as someone in college now and that can remember highschool in a somewhat recent period quite vividly. I remember being in highschool, being given material, but very little review material or periods of time in class to ask questions and discuss. Then students would cram for their tests, take the tests and forget it all. Not only was there lack of review with parents at home but there was lack of review in class as well. It is worse in my college classes. Everything is based on passing a test and moving on. There isn't any real enrichment with the material, no way to fully absorb it. My math class now focuses on giving us a formula, showing us how to work PARTS of a problem, showing us how to use a calculator to find the entire answer, and moving on. It is reliant on the calculator and we are REQUIRED to have a calculator in tests.........That is what is consistent in my area with schools and the focus on taking tests and moving forward. Students move to a higher level and rely on their previous cheat sheets or a calculator to get through. When you get the good teachers who are REALLY focused on a true education, it is totally different. I absorbed SO MUCH in my Spanish class last spring. He didn't care about what the state required in terms of testing, he cared that we KNEW how to speak, read, spell, tell different slangs and origins. It was amazing. But on the opposite hand, seeing what students are moving forward with so little skills because of the lack of focus on students absorbing material, that is scary. There are people going into nursing who cannot spell, cannot solve simple algebra. They have to administer drugs to us and take our temperatures, weights, know anatomy. Then again, they don't fully learn anatomy because they cram it all in for one test, then cram another set in, instead of truly sitting and studying the subject. Again, I don't fully feel it 's the teachers' faults though as they are given requirements and they are given standardized tests to follow and they are reviewed to meet certain expectations. I think it might all just be a vicious cycle with a lack of focus on achieving as high a level of education as possible. At the same time, throughout time there have been different levels of education amongst communities, so perhaps we will continue to see that, or perhaps it is because it is imposed upon people based on their financial status and their hardships, which again takes us back to the beginning.

I also see a lot of the "everyone is a winner" mentality. I'm not sure how it ties in to education, besides a lack of discipline and a lack of reprimand or consequence when assignments aren't completed as they are supposed to. I do believe that it will affect overall life skills though.

And my thoughts are dry for the moment. I want to think on this some more.