<p>
That’s a funny picture.</p>
<p>True! </p>
<p>It’s awful that he expressed himself in such a way. If he wouldn’t have attacked my generation and focused on his concerns in a caring way, maybe there would be something gained out of his article. There probably is something that should be done to help the students in the awful situations that he talked about. But criticizing a whole age range isn’t the way to get it done. Because every generation has worries about the next, it is human nature. There is a difference between trying to help and evolve from those concerns and brutally putting the students down and claiming they have no greater chance of being great than mud or dirt. (Come to think of it though, dirt is very important with plants and stuff. So maybe… haha)</p>
<p>A lot has to do with the location of the schools (and Prop. 13). Oakland public schools are indeed pretty bad; I was not surprised by the tone of the article. On the other hand, neighboring Berkeley High, for all its faults, sends a lot of kids to top colleges. Still, it seems true that parents who can afford it and who have kids who are willing, frequently opt for private schools in the nonsuburban Bay Area.</p>
<p>Fair enough. But the author did not say most parents in Oakland or even most parents in the Bay area. He said “Most affluent parents in America.” How much more sloppy journalism can get than this? Where is the data on which such a sweeping statement is being made?</p>
<p>For a counterpoint, see the article in the New York Times today about how the principal of (affluent) Needham, MA (public) high school is trying to reduce stress among his high achieving, competitive students. The students in Needham (or Lexington or Newton or Brookline, MA or Scarsdale, NY or many other affluent school districts) are not rushing to private schools.</p>
<p>Morford is a local columnist with an over-the-top, Hunter S. Thompson-ish style. Example:<br>
I wouldn’t take his column too literally or too seriously. It’s more in the nature of food for thought played for laughs.</p>
<p>Perhaps the silliest thing in the article was saying that kids who watch TV before the age of 6 have their heads permanently scrambled – that would include just about everyone, including people who grew up in the 50’s and watched Micky Mouse Club.<br>
The Bay Area suburban schools are actually pretty good, but are subsidized by parents; in areas without such subsidies (done privately, to pay, for example, for music programs, or, in Berkeley, through high local taxes for schools and libraries), California schools have really gone downhill because of low government spending.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I don’t know about having my head “permanently scrambled” by the Mickey Mouse Club. The main thing I remember about that show is that, no matter how many times I asked her to stop, Annette Funicello - Mouseketeerdom’s ne plus ultra - kept sending me these secret messages through the TV screen.</p>
<p>^Exactly.</p>
<p>That article has almost no basis in fact. It’s all opinion. We are NOT “dumber than dirt”, thank you very much.</p>
<p>Also, I don’t think low government spending makes or breaks a school. My school in no means has a lot of money, but we’re still a great school.</p>
<p>I think it’s funny that everyone on here thinks this is such an outrageous stereotype. Have you spent anytime in your average urban high school lately??? How about your average rural high school? Do these kids not count in the overall scheme of things?</p>
<p>They even have a new term for our schools, “Dropout Factory.” Of course EVERY school denies being a dropout factory. Ha. If only that were true.</p>
<p>
<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/30/AR2007103000154.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/30/AR2007103000154.html</a></p>
<p>In my city, our dropout rate is an astonishing 61%. In our six county region, including the most prestigious and wealthy high schools where the dropout rate is very low, only 76% graduate in 4 years. (Some of those go on to get GED degrees.)</p>
<p>And would you consider barely graduating a well-educated person? If you had any idea how low the standards are in many of these schools. They can barely do 6th grade math. They can barely read. They can’t write at all.</p>
<p>Dumb as dirt? Yeah. Maybe.</p>
<p>Weenie:</p>
<p>Most Americans do not attend “your average urban high school” or most Americans living near rural schools. The author did not say most affluent Americans living in cities send their kids to private schools. He said “most affluent Americans.” Period. No qualification except for income.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We are, as far as urban public education is concerned, essentially at rock bottom.<a href=“I%20didn’t%20really%20see%20that%20the%20article%20was%20solely%20slanted%20to%20affluent.”>/quote</a></p>
<p>Also, I somehow doubt MOST American kids attend private or wealthy suburban high schools. Hence my point, don’t the urban/rural kids count?</p>
<p>Weenie:</p>
<p>This is the quote that started this thread:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From this quote, it does not appear that the author is concerned about rural kids (are they from affluent families?)</p>
<p>Well, soozievt and rest of the VT cohort are the poster children of brilliant and highly achieving kids from rural publics. ND also registers the highest math scores in the country, and I’m assuming it has its fair share of rural publics. Some urban magnets are incredible schools – Bronx Science, Styvesant in NY, others in other places.</p>
<p>We do need to do much, much more for most urban public schools, but I think this has more to do with money, gangs, burned out teacher, lack of texts, poor facilities, immigrant groups who have difficulty with English, etc.</p>
<p>Blaming TV and the kids is silly and simplistic.</p>
<p>See Freedom Writers for what one urban teacher could do. Gang violence and balkanizaiton of students was destroying the lives of her students. These were social problems, not academic problems, though most had written the students off.</p>
<p>The school Freedom Writers is based on is actually in my town, and my school district. ^_^</p>
<p>Maybe I’m spoiled/biased because I’ve been blessed with a really great HS, but I disagree with you, weenie. All of the urban high schools around here are really great-for the students who try.</p>
<p>High School is one of those things where you get out of it what you put in. The kids who drop out, in my opinion, shouldn’t count because they aren’t trying (obviously or they wouldn’t have dropped out).</p>
<p>Now I realize that there’s a difference when it comes to financial circumstances that force some students to drop out. But those are the minority around here.</p>
<p>HisGrace – Yes, my suspicion is that you are “spoiled/blessed.” And I don’t think you understand the reasons kids drop out. You must not have any contact with these kids? And your statement, “…shouldn’t count because they aren’t trying…”?! Do you mean that? Don’t forget that these kids are our kids’ peer groups – and will carry our country into whatever future they end up with.</p>
<p>There are cities all over this country that basically contain ZERO affluent families. They just don’t have a voice here on an internet forum. But I don’t think they should be ignored either.</p>
<p>Anyway, how fortunate you are to live amongst such affluence that the minority of kids who drop out do so for financial reasons. :(</p>
<p>Yes, weenie, that’s really the case here. Most of the kids that drop out don’t actually drop out, but are removed from school in the middle of junior year because they aren’t on track to graduate. And why aren’t they on track? Because they’re not trying. It’s not like it’s so difficult to graduate high school or anything.</p>
<p>But “shouldn’t count” perhaps wasn’t the right words. Allow me to rephrase: </p>
<p>The article in question should not have told us that we’re all “Dumber than dirt” because of drop-outs. That’s not fair to those of us who do try.</p>
<p>BTW…they’re not my “kids’” peer groups…they’re my peers. So I would say yes, I have had contact with quite a few of them.</p>
<p>Hisgrace - Sorry, I did not realize that you are a student. I find that when people actually work or live with the population served most poorly by our educational system they begin to understand the complexity of it all. It’s really much deeper than simply not trying. And believe me, there’s plenty of fault to go around.</p>
<p>Oh trust me, I don’t think it’s all a case of simply not trying. It’s just that by far that’s the majority that I live with. But I don’t by any means suggest that that’s the only case.</p>
<p>I haven’t gone into a High School that is severely minority filled. But as I said, my middle school was. It was awful. However, the students had no desire to improve their situation. I came in and I tried, I really tried, and the teachers were so encouraged. No one had tried for years. Still, it didn’t help. I would be the only one trying, and I know for a fact many of those people I went to school with are no longer in school. I’m not saying it was all their fault, they were in a bad situation, but they weren’t trying to get something out of it either. </p>
<p>Then my current school… Its rural. Middle of Indiana, no city close. People have parties in cornfields etc. People are trying, some of them. They do well. It is a different environment some of the time. </p>
<p>I hate my high school. I hate some aspects of our education system. However; I think that even with the worst situations just trying can make a world of difference. </p>
<p>Some of the reasons for dropping out may be unavoidable. But at the middle school I went to, that wasn’t the case. :(</p>
<p>It’s one teacher’s opinion. He has some valid criticisms. Like a lot of us curmudgeonly old folks, he exaggerates the negative and romanticizes the way things used to be.</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, his observations in no way reflect the kids I work with every week on my robotics teams or in the Boy Scouts. I’m pretty happy how well these kids are turning out despite the obstacles of government-controlled education.</p>