PDA

View Full Version : Radicalism is no longer taught only in college...


Jenson71
08-23-2007, 03:30 PM
The American Legion Magazine
September, 2007

Failing Grades

Radicalism is no longer taught only in college; many younger students are getting a head start.

Schools traditionally emphasized the “three Rs” – reading, ’riting and ’rithmetic. Recently a “fourth R” seems to have entered the American schoolhouse: radicalism.

“When you go into a class where you’re supposed to learn about government or geography,” high-school junior Sean Allen says, “you expect to learn what the truth is.” He found out last year that some teachers don’t share his expectation. An Accelerated World Geography class at Overland High School in suburban Denver featured diatribes against the United States, capitalism and President Bush. His frustration over anti-American classroom rhetoric thrust him into a national debate over the limits of academic freedom.

“Sean had told me the teacher was pretty radical,” his father, Jeff Allen, recalls.

How radical? The teacher, Jay Bennish, used a geography class to declare capitalism “an economic system at odds with humanity.” He called the United States “the most violent nation on earth.” He said Bush’s 2006 State of the Union address “sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler used to say.”

Remember, these comments came in a geography class for 10th graders.

Sean’s dad couldn’t believe what his son was reporting. Sean started recording lectures to help in note-taking. When he played Bennish’s rant for his father, the elder Allen called the school principal to let her know what was going on in the classroom.

Almost a week later, still awaiting a response, Allen sent syndicated columnist Walter Williams an e?mail detailing the situation. “I didn’t think, unless I had the backing of someone like a Walter Williams, that the school would take any action,” Allen says.

Williams wrote a column on the brewing controversy. Then a local radio station aired the recording and interviewed Sean, as did Fox News Channel. Along the way, Bennish was suspended but was later reinstated. “The intent was not to bust the teacher,” Allen explains. “The intent was to get the teacher to teach what he was hired to teach.”

Indeed, children are the very definition of impressionable. That’s one reason why so many people choose education as a vocation, and thank goodness they do. It’s a hard, often thankless job that literally cultivates our most precious resource. But as Sara Dogan of Parents and Students for Academic Freedom (PSAF) observes, “Many teachers take advantage of their positions of authority. Their role is to educate, not indoctrinate.”

Sean says 90 percent of the student body supported him, but he did receive threats and felt compelled to enroll in a different school. He also received hundreds of e-mails from all across the country – even from soldiers in Iraq. “Sean has gotten a lot of support from our troops,” his father says. “One soldier even sent him a flag and a letter of appreciation. That makes it all worth it.”

Sean, who later returned to Overland, hopes his ordeal shows parents and students that the biased brand of education common at U.S. universities and colleges is making its way into the earlier grades. “It’s a huge problem in high school,” Sean says. “By the time you’re in college, you’re sort of numb to it, or you just go along with it.”

The New Math. David Horowitz, one of the founders of the so-called New Left that helped radicalize college campuses in the 1960s, agrees. “The kids are already brainwashed by the time they get to college,” he says. Horowitz is now one of the most ardent critics of the far left, credited with launching a family of organizations that promote academic freedom and serve as watchdogs against political indoctrination in the classroom. One of those organizations is Parents and Students for Academic Freedom. “It is much, much worse at the K-12 level because the kids are so young,” Horowitz says. “It’s unbelievable what they are allowed to do at K-12 schools.”

He points to the Bennish case and also to what he observed firsthand at Pacific Palisades High School in 2005. Working with antiwar groups, the school’s English department planned what Horowitz calls “an indoctrination session for 14- to 18-year-olds.” Those attending the program, which took place during school hours, were treated to vitriolic lessons like: Iraq was a war for oil; the war on terror was caused by America’s support for Israel; and U.S. troops have killed 100,000 innocent Iraqis. Horowitz also attended, due to a mistake by the organizers. He provided balance, and facts, to the program. He also listened to students, who reported that some teachers intimidated them and kicked them out of class when they mentioned Saddam Hussein’s brutal record.

Those who dismiss episodes like these as isolated cases “are completely wrong,” Horowitz says. He cites the trend within schools of education – the places that teach teachers – to promote the “social-justice movement,” which in his view is “a movement to indoctrinate students in our K-12 schools.”

As evidence, PSAF has put together a survey of the most prominent texts used in U.S. schools of education. One openly concludes that teachers “cannot hide behind notions of neutrality or objectivity.” Another, geared to grade-school math teachers, includes a lesson plan condemning U.S. military action against the Taliban.

A Bill Too Far? PSAF is helping parents and policymakers expose and reverse such “politicization in the American school system” by promoting a student bill of rights. The Arizona legislature, for example, has considered a controversial bill to protect students and prohibit “any instructor in a public K-12 or postsecondary institution while in the instructor’s official capacity from endorsing, supporting or opposing any political candidate or office, legislation, litigation or court action or advocating one side of a social, political or cultural issue that is a matter of partisan controversy.” The bill’s proposed penalties include revocation of teaching certification and up to a $500 fine.

Horowitz opposes the bill’s college-related elements. “I have never advocated legislation that would monitor or restrict what university instructors say in their classrooms,” he recently wrote. But he supports the K-12 elements.

The distinction makes sense. Most K-12 students, as Dogan observes, “don’t have the maturity of college students to protest what is happening or even to tell their parents.”

Arizona lawmakers aren’t the only ones wading into controversial education issues. Early this year, New Jersey lawmakers passed a measure that would have allowed schools to stop observing and/or teaching about Veterans Day and Memorial Day. New Jersey Legionnaires and other veterans groups called on Gov. Jon Corzine to veto the bill, which he did. “Given the past sacrifices of our veterans and the sacrifices now being made by those serving in the armed forces, especially the sacrifices of those who gave their lives in service to their country,” Corzine said in his veto message, “it is imperative that New Jersey schoolchildren be reminded of those valiant men and women who have demonstrated their patriotism, love of country, and willingness to serve and sacrifice for the common good.”

It would appear that teachers and administrators are the ones who need to be reminded about patriotism, sacrifice and service. One former teacher reports that many public schools in Los Angeles have given up on the Pledge of Allegiance. “Teachers openly opposed reciting the pledge,” says Ari Kaufman, who taught in Los Angeles public schools from 2001 to 2005. “I even recall elementary-school teachers having kids make ‘No War in Iraq’ posters.” Kaufman ultimately lost the energy to keep teaching. “I got along with the parents and loved the kids. But the radicalized teachers and teachers unions disenchanted me.”

In San Francisco, the board of education voted to end the Junior ROTC program in late 2006. Even though the program is completely voluntary, promotes community service and keeps some 1,600 kids off the streets, it will be phased out. Likewise, the JROTC program at Los Angeles’ Roosevelt High is under assault from an alliance of students and agenda-minded teachers, contributing to a 43-percent drop in the number of cadets. The Los Angeles Times reports that some teachers “are openly hostile toward JROTC.”

The San Mateo Union High School District in California has been mulling ways to limit military-recruiter access to students. The Madison Metropolitan School District in Wisconsin has already done so. The Garfield High School PTA in Seattle started the anti-recruiting trend in 2005, when it declared that “public schools are not a place for military recruiters.” But the law says otherwise. The No Child Left Behind Act, which passed Congress with broad bipartisan support in 2002, directs high schools to “provide military recruiters the same access to secondary school students as is provided ... to post-secondary educational institutions or to prospective employers.”

Teachers at Frank Allis Elementary School in Madison, Wis., gave their third-graders an assignment to write antiwar letters to the president, members of Congress and other students. At La Escuela Fratney, a bilingual public school in Milwaukee, fifth-grade teacher Bob Peterson touted the benefits of leading his students in “The Pledge of Resistance” and using antiwar folk songs in the classroom. “Wake up! The children are dying, the children of Iraq!” are in the lyrics of one song. Among the other titles he recommends: “Bombs over Baghdad,” “The Price of Oil” and “Bomb Da World.” It is a class for 10-year-olds.

A group calling itself “Educators to Stop the War” convenes conferences where teachers conduct workshops on topics such as “Art to Stop the War,” “Blood for Oil? Teaching about Economics-Based War, Grades 7-12” and “Creating a Student Antiwar Movement.” One conference in New York City hosted 750 kindergarten-to-college educators.

Standing Up. Teachers aren’t the only ones pushing agendas in the classroom. This year at Tucson Accelerated High School, a public charter school, the student council voted to end the daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. In response, junior Sam Lucero and his younger brother, Robert, led a protest. “We took flags to school and sang the National Anthem and said the Pledge of Allegiance,” Sam explains. “Most of the kids said it was a waste of time. But I’m an American, and there are people fighting for that flag. The least we can do is stand up and say the pledge.”

Two of his siblings are deployed in Iraq. His oldest brother, Marine Lance Cpl. Joshua Lucero, was killed in 2004 in Iraq. “He didn’t die for nothing,” Sam says. “He fought for the flag. It symbolizes hope and freedom.”

Sam plans to follow in his brother’s footsteps and enlist in the Marines after graduation. “I want to fight for our country,” he says with pride, having won his battle for the flag. The student council reversed its decision. Lawyers from the Alliance Defense Fund reminded the school that “prohibiting the recitation of the pledge violates both Arizona statutory law and the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

Students like Sam Lucero and Sean Allen, who unafraid to speak out, have successfully spun the flipside of academic freedom – the freedom for a young person to receive a fair and balanced education in an American classroom taught from daily lesson plans rather than political agendas.

Alan W. Dowd, a senior fellow at the Sagamore Institute, is a contributing editor to The American Legion Magazine.

http://www.legion.org/?section=publications&subsection=pubs_mag_index&content=pub_mag_grades_0907

Adept Havelock
08-23-2007, 03:43 PM
Horowitz opposes the bill’s college-related elements. “I have never advocated legislation that would monitor or restrict what university instructors say in their classrooms,” he recently wrote. But he supports the K-12 elements.



I can certainly agree with this. The K-12 part is spot-on, but I'm with Horowitz in opposing the college limitations.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2007, 04:07 PM
i don't like the idea of teachers trying to install political or religious beliefs to their students.

i don't like that Pat Robertson has a school
i don't like that this teacher is teaching anti-bush stuff.



teach the facts .... teach the kids to think for themselves ..... get the hell out of the way.

Taco John
08-23-2007, 04:51 PM
Schooling should be privatized.

Pitt Gorilla
08-23-2007, 09:18 PM
Am I supposed to be teaching "radicalism?!?" Wow, I totally missed that memo.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2007, 09:32 PM
Schooling should be privatized.
wouldn't that just increase the problem

Taco John
08-23-2007, 09:34 PM
wouldn't that just increase the problem



How so? Privatized schooling would increase diversity of thought. Parents would have the ultimate say, because they could vote with their dollars.

Public schooling isn't the pinnacle of education.

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 10:45 PM
Am I supposed to be teaching "radicalism?!?" Wow, I totally missed that memo.

That's because you were already DOING it....happily, and willingly. ;)

Horrowitz is 100% spot-on. Period. End of discussion.

Only radicals, or ignorant folks, would dare suggest otherwise. :shake:

tiptap
08-23-2007, 10:46 PM
How so? Privatized schooling would increase diversity of thought. Parents would have the ultimate say, because they could vote with their dollars.

Public schooling isn't the pinnacle of education.

Because when you make dollars the declaration of currency, instead of integrity or value of life or equal access of opportunity, you have already conceded the value that you wish to hold in highest regard. You have stacked the deck that markets always have all the facts to make determinations and that like a god it magically always gets it right instead of just at times being a Ouiji Board or a cornered market.

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 10:49 PM
How so? Privatized schooling would increase diversity of thought. Parents would have the ultimate say, because they could vote with their dollars.

Public schooling isn't the pinnacle of education.

I'm just fine with privatizing education.

School districts that are shitty, would lose students; good districts (the ones doing their jobs) would have nothing to worry about.

And Isaac, much to your chagrin, I'd make a helluva lot more money then, than I do now. I guarantee it. And that is even if I didn't become an administrator in such a system. :)

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 10:51 PM
Because when you make dollars the declaration of currency, instead of integrity or value of life or equal access of opportunity, you have already conceded the value that you wish to hold in highest regard. You have stacked the deck that markets always have all the facts to make determinations and that like a god it magically always gets it right instead of just at times being a Ouiji Board or a cornered market.

Says the Chicken Little folks who fear their ideas will not withstand the scrutiny of well-educated decisions.

:)

ClevelandBronco
08-23-2007, 11:09 PM
How so? Privatized schooling would increase diversity of thought. Parents would have the ultimate say, because they could vote with their dollars.

Public schooling isn't the pinnacle of education.

I agree 100% with your position, but they're not really the parents' dollars. They're (for the most part) property owners' dollars initially, then they're the students' dollars.

But I'm picking nits, so I'll go back to saying that I agree 100% with your position.

Pitt Gorilla
08-23-2007, 11:15 PM
A good chunk of my Master's level students teach at private schools. From what they report, the overall quality of teaching is about the same in private and public schools (at least in Iowa). I was actually surprised to hear that from them.

ClevelandBronco
08-23-2007, 11:20 PM
A good chunk of my Master's level students teach at private schools. From what they report, the overall quality of teaching is about the same in private and public schools (at least in Iowa). I was actually surprised to hear that from them.

So, since your Master's level students claim that teaching is about the same, and since it costs less to educate a kid in a private school, I'm pretty sure you'd agree that the dollars should follow the students to whatever kind of school they and their parents choose.

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 11:38 PM
A good chunk of my Master's level students teach at private schools. From what they report, the overall quality of teaching is about the same in private and public schools (at least in Iowa). I was actually surprised to hear that from them.

That's being kind, and generous....to PRIVATE schools.

The reason private schools often "do as well" or even "out-perform" public schools, is due to the demographic composition of the student body of private schools, compared to the student body at public schools.

Think about it: income, parental support, two-parent families are all....advantages most private schools enjoy; conversely, more special ed students, more second language-emigrant students, and less "stable" home life are challenges that nearly ALL public schools face, that comparable and similarly-situated private schools don't face.

The argument is apples versus oranges.

If many public schools had the same "raw material (students)" being fed into them, as similarly situated private schools.....much "higher-grade" 'raw material'....public schools would FAR out-perform your average private school.

I can only speak from my experience, but generally speaking....our PUBLIC district is very reluctant to hire most experienced PRIVATE school teachers into our district, because....simply put....they do not measure up. Period.

How many teachers would, honestly, accept a $10-20K pay "cut" to teach in private schools? Some would--due to a less challenging student body. But not many. Most are not that magnanimous.

Pitt Gorilla
08-23-2007, 11:46 PM
I can only speak from my experience, but generally speaking....our PUBLIC district is very reluctant to hire most experienced PRIVATE school teachers into our district, because....simply put....they are not qualified. Period.I think that's true in many districts. However, there are also some very highly qualified teachers in the private schools around here. Of course, those teachers also talk about their colleagues and not usually in good terms.

Pitt Gorilla
08-23-2007, 11:49 PM
So, since your Master's level students claim that teaching is about the same, and since it costs less to educate a kid in a private school, I'm pretty sure you'd agree that the dollars should follow the students to whatever kind of school they and their parents choose.I don't know and I honestly don't care; they come to me regardless. I can tell you that most of the private school administrators et al. don't want "vouchers." Currently, the private schools don't have to play by NCLB rules. If they accept vouchers, they do. Also, as Kotter noted, it changes their demographics (and, likely, achievement scores), and usually not in a way that they prefer. Private schools, for the most part, are fine with the current system.

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 11:53 PM
I think that's true in many districts. However, there are also some very highly qualified teachers in the private schools around here. Of course, those teachers also talk about their colleagues and not usually in good terms.

In some private schools, you may be right (private schools in which their teachers earn MORE than public school teachers in the local area--but those are rare.)

However, as a rule....you are just wrong. MOST private school teachers earn significantly LESS that public school teachers in the same locale. In a capitalist society, I can assure you....that higher quality teachers will seek higher levels of compensation.

In other words, in most places private schools are succeeding NOT because of the quality of their teaching staff, but because of parental support, income, and family stability (as compared to their public school counterparts.)

Private school teachers loathe admitting it; but it's the truth.

They know it; and so does anyone else with a brain.

90% of highly qualified teachers would happily accept a 10-30% percent raise, for simply teaching in a marginally "more challenging" district--given a choice in the matter.

It's simple economics. :shrug:

Pitt Gorilla
08-23-2007, 11:56 PM
In some private schools, you may be right (private schools in which their teachers earn MORE than public school teachers in the local area--but those are rare.)

However, as a rule....you are just wrong. MOST private school teachers earn significantly LESS that public school teachers in the same locale. In a capitalist society, I can assure you....that higher quality teachers will seek higher levels of compensation.

In other words, in most places private schools are succeeding NOT because of the quality of their teaching staff, but because of parental support, income, and family stability (as compared to their public school counterparts.)

Private school teachers loathe admitting it; but it's the truth.

They know it; and so does anyone else with a brain.

90% of highly qualified teachers would happily accept a 10-30% percent raise, for simply teaching in a marginally "more challenging" district--give a choice in the matter.

It's simple economics. :shrug:The schools are Catholic and that plays a huge role here. I have no idea regarding pay, but I would guess it is close.

Mr. Kotter
08-23-2007, 11:59 PM
I don't know and I honestly don't care; they come to me regardless. I can tell you that most of the private school administrators et al. don't want "vouchers." Currently, the private schools don't have to play by NCLB rules. If they accept vouchers, they do. Also, as Kotter noted, it changes their demographics (and, likely, achievement scores), and usually not in a way that they prefer. Private schools, for the most part, are fine with the current system.

That's because they are cherry-picking pussies who know, that with an even playing field, public education in about 65-70 percent of the country....would friggen clean their clocks. :cuss:

Honestly, they LIKE their little elitist, arrogant, and stuffy little "insulated" worlds.

They can't hang in the real world; and, you are right about that at least....they know they can't hang with us, in most cases.

KC Public Schools, Omaha Public Schools, and other "urban areas"....of course, being the exceptions.

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 12:04 AM
The schools are Catholic and that plays a huge role here. I have no idea regarding pay, but I would guess it is close.

Catholic schools CAN be an exception. However, in our public district....it's vert common for an experienced Catholic school teacher to not even get an interview in our public schools. Very few measure up.

I'm dead serious. I student taught at the local Catholic HS 15 years ago; I personally know of at least 5-6 experienced teachers there, who've applied for jobs in our district....and they have not so much as gotten a sniff.

ClevelandBronco
08-24-2007, 12:37 AM
That's because they are cherry-picking pussies who know, that with an even playing field, public education in about 65-70 percent of the country....would friggen clean their clocks. :cuss:

Honestly, they LIKE their little elitist, arrogant, and stuffy little "insulated" worlds.

They can't hang in the real world; and, you are right about that at least....they know they can't hang with us, in most cases.

KC Public Schools, Omaha Public Schools, and other "urban areas"....of course, being the exceptions.

I pulled my kids out of an "elitist, arrogant, and stuffy little 'insulated' world" and put them in a public system instead.

But you're wrong, IMO, that public schools on the average offer a better product than private schools. The best private schools provide a superior education when compared to the best public schools. The worst private schools don't usually underperform nearly to level of the worst public schools.

However, I'm sure that you can find anecdotal evidence (or evidence that's bought and paid for by the teachers' unions) to support your claim.

Taco John
08-24-2007, 02:05 AM
Because when you make dollars the declaration of currency, instead of integrity or value of life or equal access of opportunity, you have already conceded the value that you wish to hold in highest regard. You have stacked the deck that markets always have all the facts to make determinations and that like a god it magically always gets it right instead of just at times being a Ouiji Board or a cornered market.


I only wish I had any clue what you are trying to say. It's wonderful prose, but from what I can tell, you're on a very different page than I am (if not planet).

Taco John
08-24-2007, 02:23 AM
I agree 100% with your position, but they're not really the parents' dollars. They're (for the most part) property owners' dollars initially, then they're the students' dollars.

But I'm picking nits, so I'll go back to saying that I agree 100% with your position.


I understand why you are saying about them being property owners dollars. I have a problem with that, but that's another discussion. My point is that parents should be given ALL of the dollars designated toward providing their kids an education in the form of school vouchers, which they then would spend on the open market school system.

The government's role after that would be to protect the integrity of education and ensuring that they are not being taken advantage of (ie. packing the class rooms to overflow).

Taco John
08-24-2007, 02:32 AM
Think about it: income, parental support, two-parent families are all....advantages most private schools enjoy; conversely, more special ed students, more second language-emigrant students, and less "stable" home life are challenges that nearly ALL public schools face, that comparable and similarly-situated private schools don't face.


It's my firm belief that if parents were given more choice in their children's schooling, more parents would feel empowered and take more interest in their kids education, rather than feeling like a helpless bystander.

patteeu
08-24-2007, 06:34 AM
I understand why you are saying about them being property owners dollars. I have a problem with that, but that's another discussion. My point is that parents should be given ALL of the dollars designated toward providing their kids an education in the form of school vouchers, which they then would spend on the open market school system.

The government's role after that would be to protect the integrity of education and ensuring that they are not being taken advantage of (ie. packing the class rooms to overflow).

I agree with most of what you've said in this thread, but don't you think that by using a voucher system the government would tinker and eventually attach so many strings that the private school system would have many of the same problems as the public school system?

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 06:43 AM
....
However, I'm sure that you can find anecdotal evidence (or evidence that's bought and paid for by the teachers' unions) to support your claim.

I would bet, statistically speaking....as a percentage of school districts across the country, that I am right too.

I think YOU are right, in many of the larger URBAN areas of the country; however, I think MY position would prevail in the more numerous suburban, smaller community, and rural areas of the country (even insofar as they would be larger, population-wise as well.)

I don't have the studies or stats in front of me to prove it, but I'd be willing to bet more than a few twelve packs on that one. ;)

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 06:50 AM
It's my firm belief that if parents were given more choice in their children's schooling, more parents would feel empowered and take more interest in their kids education, rather than feeling like a helpless bystander.

I think for many you would be right; OTOH, I don't know what the percentage would be....I'd bet not as many as you might think.

I agree with most of what you've said in this thread, but don't you think that by using a voucher system the government would tinker and eventually attach so many strings that the private school system would have many of the same problems as the public school system?

That is but one of the "devils" in the detail of such a shift.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 08:45 AM
Because when you make dollars the declaration of currency, instead of integrity or value of life or equal access of opportunity, you have already conceded the value that you wish to hold in highest regard. You have stacked the deck that markets [b]always have all the facts to make determinations and that like a god it magically always gets it right instead of just at times being a Ouiji Board or a cornered market.
If individuals in the market lack perfect information; then neither does a govt system because it doesn't exist. I would argue it's even more imperfect for the govt as it's committee-think that makes decisions for individuals. And no group can know what is best for each individual.

My kid goes to a private school that accepts EVERYBODY in the early years (true of her previous K school too). They don't accept the later years because as they claim they are already too "ruined" work with. The programs are individually tailored more than a public school as much as possibly can be done. If any child, has a difficulty that can't be handled within that set-up they don't send them to get pills, they have a conference with the parent with recommendations for handling that child one-on-one, which is what is usually needed. They refer tutors they trust. Then the kid can come back.

One problem with public school, is that not all children or people, do well with one type learning method or system. In fact many of our genious who made scientific breakthroughs had an unconventional education. Isaac Newton dropped out.

ClevelandBronco
08-24-2007, 09:15 AM
My kid goes to a private school that accepts EVERYBODY in the early years

Bullshit.

Mi_chief_fan
08-24-2007, 09:17 AM
Some excellent ideas on both sides. I can honestly say thet this whole debate caused me to change my major from secendary ed a few years back, because no matter what, a teacher can't please everyone.

From the teachers I know, in public and private schools, the private schools aren't paid as well, but they have one big advantage: they don't have to devote most of the school year preparing kids for standardized tests; instead, they teach the subjects!!! I know, real visionary stuff, but public schools, even the best of them, live or die with the results of the standardized test, which, I think reasonable people would admit don't always tell the whole story.

And, of course, what Kotter said about "cherry picking" is right, and I know in Michigan in 2000, when the voucher issue was on the ballot, every private school in W. Michigan and the Detroit Catholic League all said they would refuse the vouchers, because they feared intrusion from the government and from parents of voucher students, and they didn't want any "outsiders" making trouble for them; they want to run their schools their way.

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 09:29 AM
....My kid goes to a private school that accepts EVERYBODY in the early years (true of her previous K school too)...


Major League Bullshit. :BS:

At a minimum, there are socioeconomic.....barriers that prevent many kids from attending that school. Socioeconomic barriers that are also accompanied by many other "challenging" aspects of student demographic factors.

And I guarantee MOST kids with intellectual/behavioral/psycho-social issues that BEGIN at that school....end up in public schools (usually by 4th grade) because they will have a conference with the principal explaining how "we can't meet your child's needs." It often happens just before standardized testing of that kid....would tarnish their artificially inflated "excellent" test scores.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 09:45 AM
Major League Bullshit. :BS:
Very nice.
See now I think a teacher not getting a sniff of an offer from a public school is not necessarily a bad thing.

At a minimum, there are socioeconomic.....barriers that prevent many kids from attending that school. Socioeconomic barriers that are also accompanied by many other "challenging" aspects of student demographic factors.

And I guarantee MOST kids with intellectual/behavioral/psycho-social issues that BEGIN at that school....end up in public schools (usually by 4th grade) because they will have a conference with the principal explaining how "we can't meet your child's needs." It often happens just before standardized testing of that kid....would tarnish their artificially inflated "excellent" test scores.
I'm not talking economic barriers. However, there's a black woman who took her kid out of public school early enough for this school to accept her son. He did so well that she works three jobs to keep him there.

And really, it's not the money with most of the middle class. They just don't want to pay the price. ( barring the upscale ritzy places that most can't afford).

As for a child with bad psycho social issues, I guess that could be depending on the severity. But we've had them. I feel our school is too lenient allowing them to stay as long as they have. And it took other parents, including myself to complain about them to get action on it.

We have a few slower ones too. They have not been offloaded.

Don't think that parents with money don't off-load their kids as a sort of full time nanny while they're gone most of the time. Because they do, and some of those kids have behavior problems. The teachers NEVER see the parents.

But I'll agree GOVT schools have less options. But that's because they govt schools.

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 09:51 AM
.... I feel our school is too lenient allowing them to stay as long as they have. And it took other parents, including myself to complain about them to get action on it...

You see, THAT is the crux of the problem.

Public schools HAVE to accept and tolerate those kids. We don't have the luxury of being able to pass the problem elsewhere.

That's why most comparisons, between public and private schools, are ludicrous.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 09:55 AM
You see, THAT is the crux of the problem.

Public schools HAVE to accept and tolerate those kids. We don't have the luxury of being able to pass the problem elsewhere.

That's why most comparisons between public and private schools, are ludicrous.
I edited while you were posting to me.

I don't know if it's "totally" ludicrous. I think it is because you're govt run or public and I think you should not be pinned into that. Not that I have a solution to offer.

HonestChieffan
08-24-2007, 09:57 AM
Much ado about nothing. In the 70s we had many HS teachers who discussed the VietNam war and how bad it was and why we should get out.

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 10:04 AM
Much ado about nothing. In the 70s we had many HS teachers who discussed the VietNam war and how bad it was and why we should get out.

Why is it okay for schools to teach the "immorality" of a particular war, but we can't teach the "immorality" of other moral offenses (FTR, no, I'm not advocating that either)?

The bottom-line is schools should encourage open discussion, and critical thinking skills. You can't do that, when teachers are taking sides in very subjective debates like these.

Schools are suppose to educate; they are not supposed to indoctrinate.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 10:19 AM
Bullshit.
Raiduhs

Chief Faithful
08-24-2007, 10:50 AM
In some private schools, you may be right (private schools in which their teachers earn MORE than public school teachers in the local area--but those are rare.)

However, as a rule....you are just wrong. MOST private school teachers earn significantly LESS that public school teachers in the same locale. In a capitalist society, I can assure you....that higher quality teachers will seek higher levels of compensation.

In other words, in most places private schools are succeeding NOT because of the quality of their teaching staff, but because of parental support, income, and family stability (as compared to their public school counterparts.)

Private school teachers loathe admitting it; but it's the truth.

They know it; and so does anyone else with a brain.

90% of highly qualified teachers would happily accept a 10-30% percent raise, for simply teaching in a marginally "more challenging" district--given a choice in the matter.

It's simple economics. :shrug:

Not the case in Atlanta. Most of the private schools, of which there are many, have higher quality teachers (higher credentials and tougher performance standards) and they do get paid better than their public counterpart. And it is true that there is greater parental support, income, and family stability. Finally, it is also true that tuition is equal or more than many state colleges.

Some of these private schools seem to exist because of prestige, some because of religious affiliation, and some because they meet needs that cannot be meet in public schools. It is all about individual choice. What ever the reasons these schools exist private schooling and home schooling are not evil and I dread the type of communistic thinking that says governments are better at deciding what is best for the individual child instead of the parent.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 10:55 AM
What ever the reasons these schools exist private schooling and home schooling are not evil and I dread the type of communistic thinking that says governments are better at deciding what is best for the individual child instead of the parent.
:clap: :thumb:





Florida public schools are near the bottom nationwide at 35 I believe. So there's a lot more private ed around here including religious, geared for the arts and everything else in between. Lot of homeschooling here too.

Jenson71
08-24-2007, 10:57 AM
In some private schools, you may be right (private schools in which their teachers earn MORE than public school teachers in the local area--but those are rare.)

However, as a rule....you are just wrong. MOST private school teachers earn significantly LESS that public school teachers in the same locale. In a capitalist society, I can assure you....that higher quality teachers will seek higher levels of compensation.

In other words, in most places private schools are succeeding NOT because of the quality of their teaching staff, but because of parental support, income, and family stability (as compared to their public school counterparts.)

Private school teachers loathe admitting it; but it's the truth.

They know it; and so does anyone else with a brain.

90% of highly qualified teachers would happily accept a 10-30% percent raise, for simply teaching in a marginally "more challenging" district--given a choice in the matter.

It's simple economics. :shrug:


So the teachers I had for 14 years in my Catholic schools just couldn't cut it in the real world, and ended up having to accept a smaller check and the private school? That's quite a reach. Around here, a lot of my teachers came from UNI and some from ISU or UofI or Loras, just like many of the public school teachers (with the exception of Loras). They could teach anywhere in Iowa, and would gladly be accepted.

If there is a reason that private school teachers don't get jobs at the public schools (which by the way, I've seen a few teachers...very few, leave their Catholic school positions for a public school job...and I can only guess for money reasons) it's probably because they have a rough time with the transition.

I agree with some things you say. Obviously, the parents who send their children to private schools care and are USUALLY (BUT NOT ALL THE TIME) well off financially. But to suggest that the teaching is less than the average at a public school? I don't buy it, and see no reason to.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 11:27 AM
So the teachers I had for 14 years in my Catholic schools just couldn't cut it in the real world, and ended up having to accept a smaller check and the private school? That's quite a reach. Around here, a lot of my teachers came from UNI and some from ISU or UofI or Loras, just like many of the public school teachers (with the exception of Loras). They could teach anywhere in Iowa, and would gladly be accepted.

You bring up a good point, here. As I understand most teacher's are trained the same way, in the same institutions with the same requirements and curriculum This is one area I think needs reform.

I know an old teacher (63 I think) who claims that he never had any methods courses but is one of the best teachers. I think maybe things changed somewhere along the line. A teacher at my kid's school said it mostly psychology that's studied ( to social children) with not so much academic knowledge. Just what I've heard is all I'm saying.

I might add that parents do have to check private schools and those are not all equal or all that good either. There was one around here, very small that went out of business actually and had bad word of mouth. Now if that were a public school it would have just got an injection of more govt money from the taxpayer keeping it there drawing in more kids to harm.

Chief Faithful
08-24-2007, 12:05 PM
:clap: :thumb:





Florida public schools are near the bottom nationwide at 35 I believe. So there's a lot more private ed around here including religious, geared for the arts and everything else in between. Lot of homeschooling here too.

Same in Atlanta. The public schools are so bad that anyone with the means sends kids to private schools.

My third child goes to a college prep school where all the class rooms are smaller and the teachers have masters degrees plus schooling for learning disorders. The school is geared towards children with above average intelligence with mild social and learning disorders. They do not accept children with behavior disorders or low intelligence.

Expensive, but the results are amazing. ADHD children excel at this school without medication.

HonestChieffan
08-24-2007, 12:05 PM
Perhaps in the reporting in this journal, they failed to find if any teachers were spouting the exact opposite view....they would not single out just views they diasagree with would they?

Chief Faithful
08-24-2007, 12:12 PM
One of the things that was very successful when I lived in Chicago was the home school co-ops. There are relatively few private schools in Chicago compared to Atlanta, but what they did was pool the degrees and talents of the parents. For example, if the parent had a degree in Math they taught all the math subjects.

My kids went to public schools in Chicago. Because of the village structures it was easy to find and live in a community that had excellent public schools. In Atlanta everything is controlled at the county and state level, which does not work well.

Mr. Kotter
08-24-2007, 12:17 PM
Not the case in Atlanta. Most of the private schools, of which there are many, have higher quality teachers (higher credentials and tougher performance standards) and they do get paid better than their public counterpart. And it is true that there is greater parental support, income, and family stability. Finally, it is also true that tuition is equal or more than many state colleges.

Some of these private schools seem to exist because of prestige, some because of religious affiliation, and some because they meet needs that cannot be meet in public schools. It is all about individual choice. What ever the reasons these schools exist private schooling and home schooling are not evil and I dread the type of communistic thinking that says governments are better at deciding what is best for the individual child instead of the parent.

If you've read what I've written, you'll note that I began by endorsing the notion of vouchers and choice.

The problem I have with this discussion is, there is a persistent belief and attitude that private schools, generally, are "better" than public schools--and have better teachers. Simply put, it's not true.

In places like KC, Atlanta, NY, Detroit, Houston, and Chicago--that may be the case....but there are many places in smaller and more suburban areas of the country, where public schools have superior faculties AND offer better educational opportunites than are locally available in the private schools of the area. And that fact is often ignored in such discussions.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 12:20 PM
One of the things that was very successful when I lived in Chicago was the home school co-ops. There are relatively few private schools in Chicago compared to Atlanta, but what they did was pool the degrees and talents of the parents. For example, if the parent had a degree in Math they taught all the math subjects.

My kids went to public schools in Chicago. Because of the village structures it was easy to find and live in a community that had excellent public schools. In Atlanta everything is controlled at the county and state level, which does not work well.

They have those here too. But what you said in the post just above this happened to my older sister whose kids were labelled in the public system...and they had a LOT of money. She sent to a school to remediate them around age 10 and it cost $25k per year for each of two for a couple of years. Amazing job....mostly just different methods from my observation.

I think there's a lot of overlabelling and I thinks some of those symptons are due to the methods.

HonestChieffan
08-24-2007, 12:25 PM
Home school scares me.

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 12:28 PM
Home school scares me.
Then don't use it.

Chief Faithful
08-24-2007, 12:39 PM
If you've read what I've written, you'll note that I began by endorsing the notion of vouchers and choice.

The problem I have with this discussion is, there is a persistent belief and attitude that private schools, generally, are "better" than public schools--and have better teachers. Simply put, it's not true.

In places like KC, Atlanta, NY, Detroit, Houston, and Chicago--that may be the case....but there are many places in smaller and more suburban areas of the country, where public schools have superior faculties AND offer better educational opportunites than are locally available in the private schools of the area. And that fact is often ignored in such discussions.

I agree that in the rural areas it is a different equation, but it is also true in the rural areas the community has more say. Before Chicago I lived in the farm lands of Adams county, IL. so I am familar with the dynamics.

Chief Faithful
08-24-2007, 12:40 PM
Home school scares me.

For some people it should scare them. :p

tiptap
08-24-2007, 12:44 PM
If individuals in the market lack perfect information; then neither does a govt system because it doesn't exist. I would argue it's even more imperfect for the govt as it's committee-think that makes decisions for individuals. And no group can know what is best for each individual.

My kid goes to a private school that accepts EVERYBODY in the early years (true of her previous K school too). They don't accept the later years because as they claim they are already too "ruined" work with. The programs are individually tailored more than a public school as much as possibly can be done. If any child, has a difficulty that can't be handled within that set-up they don't send them to get pills, they have a conference with the parent with recommendations for handling that child one-on-one, which is what is usually needed. They refer tutors they trust. Then the kid can come back.

One problem with public school, is that not all children or people, do well with one type learning method or system. In fact many of our genious who made scientific breakthroughs had an unconventional education. Isaac Newton dropped out.

Isaac Newton dropped out because of the plague. He left Cambridge to the country and did come up with Theory of Gravity.

HonestChieffan
08-24-2007, 12:48 PM
Bad enough some people can have babies. Now they want to home school

BucEyedPea
08-24-2007, 01:10 PM
Isaac Newton dropped out because of the plague. He left Cambridge to the country and did come up with Theory of Gravity.
That's not what I read. I heard he was a poor student and didn't like it.
Later around age 10 or 12 it was a particular tutor who got him excited about learning and I believe science as well. But Newton is but one example.

Taco John
08-24-2007, 02:52 PM
If you've read what I've written, you'll note that I began by endorsing the notion of vouchers and choice.

The problem I have with this discussion is, there is a persistent belief and attitude that private schools, generally, are "better" than public schools--and have better teachers. Simply put, it's not true.

In places like KC, Atlanta, NY, Detroit, Houston, and Chicago--that may be the case....but there are many places in smaller and more suburban areas of the country, where public schools have superior faculties AND offer better educational opportunites than are locally available in the private schools of the area. And that fact is often ignored in such discussions.


I'll tell you why I ignore that fact: because parents of private schooled children are choosing to send their kids to the private schools.

ClevelandBronco
08-24-2007, 04:01 PM
I don't know and I honestly don't care; they come to me regardless. I can tell you that most of the private school administrators et al. don't want "vouchers." Currently, the private schools don't have to play by NCLB rules. If they accept vouchers, they do. Also, as Kotter noted, it changes their demographics (and, likely, achievement scores), and usually not in a way that they prefer. Private schools, for the most part, are fine with the current system.

It changes their demographics and their achievement scores? Not if they refuse to enroll students who will change their demographics and their achievement scores.