Here is honesty.

 

You can pay me all you want and it won't change a lick of how hard I teach. I do my best.

 

But when a kid as a freshmen comes to me with a 1st grade reading level, my goal is to get him up to a 6th grade reading level minimum before he leaves. I do that and I have helped him more than if he passed any state test.

 

But getting him up to that level will be extremely difficult without his willingness (he won't have it or he wouldn't be reading at that level to start) and his parents support (he won't have it).

 

A kid coming to you at the high school level with a sub-high school reading level tells me we do not have the right teachers in place for this kid.

Where did I say pass them?

 

First I do not fail them. They earn the grade they get. If it is failing, they have failed. In my classes, they get work to do and they don't do it and they earn zeroes. If you think I give free passes, well you are GROSSLY mistaken.

 

IMO if you're not giving homework because some/many will not do it, you are in the wrong.

Your logic is so out of balanced.

 

We can't accept bad schools but we can accept bad parenting. WHY????

 

Only fixing any preceived problems in schools will not fix the problem if Johnny shows up with no desire to learn.

 

Here is a real life scenario for you.

 

Elementary teacher, 1st grade has 25 kids in class. Each kid should at the very minimum read 30 minutes a day. Well obviously, the teacher cannot sit down for 12 1/2 hours in a 7 hour school day and read with the children.

 

So, the books go home for the child to read. Parents won't do it with them and the kid does not get to practice their reading and will not learn to read.

 

What does the school do? How does the change in scheduling help this.

 

THESE are the type of problems that teachers are trying to solve while politicians and everyone else is caught up on what looks pretty under the media lights.

 

 

How is my logic wrong when I say that we can't change parents but we can change how we teach?

 

Get off of the test scores issue. I see kids from all walks of life - good schools/fair schools/bad schools. All of those schools including those I send my children to, are not putting out enough quality. Yet, we're still ignoring what seems obvious to many as a potential way to improve the output.

LBBC - I hear you giving nothing but excuses and using the minority of the cases to argue for the status quo.

 

There are macro arguments and there are micro arguments. I'm talking macro since as a taxpayer and a concerned citizen I'm looking for the most bang for the buck. You're throwing out micro arguments. It comes off as a "not seeing the forest for the trees" response.

 

Those of us that do not teach for a living cannot fully grasp the frustrations. No question. However, you seem to wanting to place blame vs addressing the question at hand.

 

Can a new scheduling concept help improve the quality?

IMO if you're not giving homework because some/many will not do it, you are in the wrong.

 

Okay, I will make it simple for you...I give work and if they don't do it they get zeroes. If that makes them fail, then so be it.

 

Can a new scheduling concept help improve the quality?

 

Not if the same problems are at home and not supporting the child learning. No, I don't believe so. It does not change the core root of the problem.

 

Now saying that, I do support a better schedule than what we presently have.

 

The ONLY way I think it would improve quality is what I mentioned in a previous post. Instead of summer school, the students failing would get immediate remediation during a single week of the two week break between quarters.

LBBC - I hear you giving nothing but excuses and using the minority of the cases to argue for the status quo.

 

You call them excuses but I am giving you reasons on why your reasoning is not addressing the real problem.

 

You are wanting to address a simple solution to a complex problem. A solution that will have minimal to do to solve the problem.

 

And trust me, the kids that are the reasons why you say the schools are not successful is not the minority cases here.

The great majority of the schools are not "top schools."

 

Secondly, being a "top school" in this country is a relative term. Resting on the argument that "top schools succed" is ignoring that being a top school is not a competition filled with many candidates.

 

So, the real goal should be to improve those "other" schools.

 

Do we improve "other schools" by following a model set by those top schools. If so, logic would say to start in late August or early September, and keep a traditional schedule. One forgets, a lot of these kids learn just as much in the summer, especially if they travel a bit.

A kid coming to you at the high school level with a sub-high school reading level tells me we do not have the right teachers in place for this kid.

 

Or the right system. In a world where test scores makes or breaks a school, what do you think the kids are going to be taught, no matter what kind of schedule they have.

IMO if you're not giving homework because some/many will not do it, you are in the wrong.

 

Homework is the magic elixar?

 

You know, when I first started teaching, I thought that all kids HAD to have homework. Over the years, I've learned that, with some groups, "chunking" the information, and incorporating review a little differently, that you eliminate the need for homework.

Frankfort is on a year round schedule and has been for at least ten years. They go 9 weeks are off 3 with the first week being used for remedial training for kids that are behind to catch up. Most of the time 6 weeks off in the summer. Now under that schedule when the high school had a great principal, some very good teachers, and a very strong superintendant they were a top ten school. The principal retires, some of the very good teachers leave and after the superintendant retires the test scores go way down. Bring in a new super who in 3 years almost bankrupts the school system, the state comes into help run the school district. I guess my point is it's about the people doing the jobs, not when they're done.

Frankfort is on a year round schedule and has been for at least ten years. They go 9 weeks are off 3 with the first week being used for remedial training for kids that are behind to catch up. Most of the time 6 weeks off in the summer. Now under that schedule when the high school had a great principal, some very good teachers, and a very strong superintendant they were a top ten school. The principal retires, some of the very good teachers leave and after the superintendant retires the test scores go way down. Bring in a new super who in 3 years almost bankrupts the school system, the state comes into help run the school district. I guess my point is it's about the people doing the jobs, not when they're done.

 

I wish I had a standing ovation smilie to give you.:clap::clap::clap::clap::thumb::thumb::thumb:

 

Although I will point out again, contrary to what the state believes, test scores are not the only indicator or might not even indicate whether the school is doing well or not.

LBBC I must also agree with you on help from home. It's not passing the buck it's a reality. While I worked for FIS for 15 years I drove a bus for 14 of those. When they started the no child left behind program I would sometimes drive the bus for them. They went to one of the housing projects and rented one of the houses. They set it up to teach young children. We would go to peoples door with the bus pick up the mother and child take them to the facility, and most time feed them breakfast. I know you won't be surprised because you see it, but it amazed me how lazy people were that they wouldn't take advantage of a program that would improve their childs and their lives. While I've never been a teacher I have coached. If everyone is not on the same page and you're not getting reenforcement from home it makes the job 10X's more difficult.

And again, if it is the schedule's fault and using your same logic, other schools are making it work, so why can't our schools, IF it is the schedules fault, not make the present schedule work?

 

Maybe because it is not the schedules fault but rather we are just looking for excuses rather than holding parents responsible for the education of their child.

 

 

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

Best answer to the REAL problem. :thumb:

Frankfort is on a year round schedule and has been for at least ten years. They go 9 weeks are off 3 with the first week being used for remedial training for kids that are behind to catch up. Most of the time 6 weeks off in the summer. Now under that schedule when the high school had a great principal, some very good teachers, and a very strong superintendant they were a top ten school. The principal retires, some of the very good teachers leave and after the superintendant retires the test scores go way down. Bring in a new super who in 3 years almost bankrupts the school system, the state comes into help run the school district. I guess my point is it's about the people doing the jobs, not when they're done.

 

You've explained the point in 11 words pretty well. I would add that parents are a crucial subgroup of "the people doing the jobs."

Edited July 23, 200917 yr by mcpapa
Most 5th graders type better than I do.