<p>“All classes are done online and there are teachers in the room that are always available if you have any questions or need help.”</p>
<p>This sounds awful.</p>
<p>Wells, different strokes for different folks. I find I work best if I teach myself. I love online classes. Definitely not for everyone but definitely not awful for everyone either.</p>
<p>S just visited a college friend who is in the second year of Teach for America in Nashville. The friend has 40 students in each class and has experienced conduct that is personally threatening that gets only a verbal warning.</p>
<p>Can this be conducive to learning for even the most highly motivated student? Would online be somehow “worse?”</p>
<p>One of the huge pluses of a private is the ability to set and enforce rules.</p>
<p>
And in that simple and short statement lies the secret to most of the difficulties currently experienced in the public school system and the reason why those that can pursue privates and charters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>5 or more decades ago, the public schools used to have rules that were actually more strict than many private schools today…especially regarding sanctions. </p>
<p>Heard from dozens of older teachers and classmates’ parents that back when they attended public schools, students were much more well-behaved because teachers had the power to punish students on the spot…including the use of corporal punishment or being sent off to “reform school” for the most violent/disruptive students in a given class/school. It was also a different societal/parental mindset where the assumption was that the teacher’s/school’s word was correct and students always the ones lying. While this was bad in giving schools/teachers too much power that could be abused and students being punished for what we now know are learning disabilities, it also meant that most students/teachers didn’t worry as much about having a few violent/disruptive students ruining the educational experience for everyone else. </p>
<p>Nowadays, it seems to me that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction where it seems most public school systems are forced to cater to the LCD and the most violent/disruptive students without having any power to discipline them or to take them out of the mainstream classrooms due to fears of being sued by parents who don’t seem to understand their responsibilities* and outrage generated by those who inexplicably feel that the highly gifted/academic achiever kids can “teach themselves” and thus, if push comes to shove…they lose out on public school resources. </p>
<p>Saw some of this firsthand as a public junior high kid when it seemed many teachers weren’t willing to deal with bullying because they were afraid of being sued by the bullies’ loudmouthed parents who seemed to have more energy to force the junior high to keep their kids in school than to teach them how not to behave like violent felons.** </p>
<ul>
<li>IMHO, manners, behavior, and socialization are mostly the job of the parents/guardians. The notion that those are mostly/completely the job of public schools/schoolteachers would be considered absurd to most folks I’ve known from other countries.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>** Ironically, many of them ended up/are still serving long sentences at Rikers once they were caught committing too many serious felonies by the cops.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And plenty hold the view that is wrong to rely on a public monopoly in education. </p>
<p>Countries that are heads and shoulders above us in terms of K-12 education have relied on systems that separate the funding from the actual service provision. All recognized schools are part of the public system and are free, and parents choose according to personal preferences. The public system of education comprises both government and private schools. </p>
<p>As Winston Churchill said “The Americans will always do the right thing… after they’ve exhausted all the alternatives.” The abysmal results of more than sixty years of public monopoly combined with the role played by an overly politicized and self-serving labor unions is evident. The purported opening to a world of charter schools is nothing but a poisoned gift. Something that was astutely observed by Al Shanker, as cracking a window open in the fortress would be the best line of defense against a complete overhaul of the public education system. </p>
<p>Charters schools were set up to fail in an uneven playing field. The fact that some do better than expected is surprising. The fact that most toil in mediocrity should not surprise anyone. </p>
<p>When it comes to education, school choice is a mirage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which countries are we talking here? I’m wondering as that’s certainly not the case for the ROC(Taiwan) or many other Asian countries I know of. Then again, there’s a different cultural mindset over there about public and private as the former is with few exceptions often considered better academically than the latter. </p>
<p>Over there, if one ends up in a private school, it is often a source of shame as it is a sign that the student in question failed to demonstrate the academic bona-fides to get into a public school. This applies whether we’re talking K-12 or university levels. The stigma against most private schools in those nations according to several international students is similar to the ones we have regarding for-profit colleges here.</p>
<p>Then again, it is the government-run schools/universities in those nations which tend to have higher academic standards for entrance and graduation than most of their private counterparts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But is there a “right” to education in those countries such that the system must provide an education for everyone?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>xiggi-- do you see any way to transition to such a “free” system? The expenditure per student at the state level public school would not allow for the level of education that the private school you and I share experience with offers. My S’s senior year (2007) the endowment was $119 million and the “full” tuition was around $20K and we were told that was only about 1/2 the actual cost. How do you see a private at that level surviving in the envisioned system?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here’s one such country … The Kingdom of Belgium.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does Belgium have the diversity we have here in some school systems? In other words, is it comparable?</p>
<p>I too was wondering what countries these might be. I came here from Canada ten years ago, and thought perhaps the poster was referring to the fact that in Canada, due to Quebec and the goal of remaining unified as a country, your tax dollars can go to either the Public or Separate (Catholic) school systems. This provision flowed from a political unification challenge during the era of the Meech Lake accord, whereby Canada’s federalism was challenged with separatist threats from Quebec. Either school board now offers options in both French and English, but the Catholic school system had become an institution in its own right over a few hundred years, so it was not as simple as allowing the tax money to follow the preference of a family re: public or private. It was more an equalization of the allocation of public money to two equally strong and entrenched educational entities. </p>
<p>Now that funding follows to the public or separate institutions, so too do the civil rights of every Canadian, including accommodations for learning disabilities, et al. Unlike US charters, Canadian Catholic schools cannot just dump students who are not desirable. They also cannot deprive access to students of different religious orientations. Both systems teach to the same province-wide curriculum and the separate board is notable in its rigor. Most suspect that comes from the close-knit families on might expect to find in a parish.</p>
<p>When I first moved here, I was a big supporter of public education. Ultimately, who we are as a society is reflected in how we treat ALL our citizen, and what kind of access we give ALL citizens to a life made viable by education. But I was naive about many things when I first moved here ;)</p>
<p>I was, and remain, appalled by Charters in my area on several fronts – lack of unified or rigorous curriculum, abysmal pay scale for teachers (who on earth would want to work for them but the most unemployable of graduates?), and a notable political agenda to essentially “gut” urban school districts of viable students who could otherwise form a leadership function.</p>
<p>But I am equally appalled at what seems to go on in the public system as well, particularly in urban areas or the difference between urban and suburban schools…unequal funding among districts; ineffective retention and literacy policies in urban schools; less-than-cost-effective delivery due to the abject fragmentation of districts; and ALSO a lack of unified or rigorous curriculum between urban and suburban districts ;)</p>
<p>Back home, many of my friends in education were surprised that I of all people enrolled my son in a Gifted/Talented public magnet school upon moving the to US and being confronted with what seemed like such dismal choices (because back home I eschewed the gifted programs and instead kept him mainstreamed – at the time, I had thought it was better that he learn to negotiate ALL the people in our society and learn to lead/share his gifts ;)</p>
<p>In retrospect, I am grateful this opportunity existed, although to this day I feel a little “guilty” for not directly supporting public education by having a strong student lead by example in comprehensive schools. </p>
<p>At the end of the day, we choose what we believe is best for our children, no matter what our philosophies, it seems 
(And yes, this means I’m admitting that I was a hypocrite.) So I cut folks a wide swath when it comes to choices!</p>
<p>That said, I cannot for the life of me understand why we don’t teach to a unified national curriculum with unified national benchmarking and have a unified set of rules governing ANY educational setting that receives ANY public money.</p>
<p>That includes salary and benefits.
Period.
That includes educating at-risk students (illiterate, pregnant, or with behavioral issues) AND students with learning disabilities.</p>
<p>If we’re gonna pay, you better play by our rules.
Shame on that Louisiana charter. They just made sure one more kid lives a life that’s not viable; they’ve just fueled the kind of cyclic poverty that in the end holds ALL of America back.</p>
<p>Sigh.</p>
<p>kmcmom13, in my area charter school teacher salaries are often higher than public school teacher salaries. Not always, but the benefits are different.</p>
<p>
That’s a little bit of a stretch. Actually a lot of a stretch. Teenage pregnancy has causes and consequences much more far-reaching than the disciplinary process in a particular school. And you certainly can’t blame the school of one kid for the “cyclic poverty” of any family.</p>
<p>Fact is that there are some families that are so deep in pathology that there’s pretty much nothing that can be done to educate their kids unless the state chooses to take custody. And nobody wants that.</p>
<p>I couldn’t agree more about a nationalized curriculum, but that is slowly happening under this administration. The Common Core initiative will have standards for all states that participate and textbook publishers will no longer need to follow the standards of those states that don’t comply.</p>
<p>Belgium provides free education starting at age 2 1/2. At least 90% of the kids are enrolled. If there are not enough spots, priority goes to full time working moms. I’d be happy to start with that and see how things change here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>'Cause cities and states have having the federal government tell them to do stuff.</p>
<p>Here in Ohio, our method of school funding, based largely on property taxes, was found to be unconstitutional many years ago. Our state legislators have done exactly nothing to change it since then and apparently will not suffer any consequences for inaction.</p>
<p>So here, if you can afford it you live in a good school district and if you can’t, you don’t.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The system will never transition to the level of the school you and I know well. It is, however, an exceptional school in more than academic achievements; the facilities and the associated expenses are matching the demands of a particular set of clients. However, the landscape of private education is not only composed of the uber-wealthy schools that attract plenty of first and fifth graders --and cause such an anguish among the parents around Easter. </p>
<p>There are plenty of private schools that educate students with a much smaller budget. Not to beat the proverbial equine to death, the Catholic schools often operate at a fraction of the cost of a neighboring public school. And, yes, the critics will point out that the level of service and the “cherry-picking” of students contribute to the chasm in costs. But, in the meantime, they do operate by offering fewer frills and tend to accomplish much with little. </p>
<p>The reality we are facing is that, while there is no end in the escalation of education expenses, the income of citizens is not keeping up. Added to diminishing property values, losses of equity, the typical answer to rely on increasing property taxes is becoming a much harder idea to sell to … taxpayers. </p>
<p>Not matter how distasteful it may sound, but the system should not try to emulate the glorified country-club digs the school on Preston Road proudly displays. Neither should the “system” allows this type of extravagant expenses in public schools. To understand what I mean here, all one has to do is to drive by the athletic facilities at the suburban Shangri-Las in the DFW metroplex. Do public high schools really need fields that make professional teams envious? </p>
<p>The transition should be concentrated on our urban wastelands and should involve prodiding support to the organizations that have tried to weather the storm and have done so much good in battered communities.</p>
<p>Belgium has approximately the same number of people as Los Angeles County (approx. 10.5-11 million v. 9.98 million). It covers approx. 11,000 sqare miles v. 4,780 square miles in LA County. It has approx. 6.5 million (Dutch) Flemmish and 4.5 Walloons (French)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Regretfully, too many of societies ugly behaviors are seen and supported in our public school system. Surliness, lack of respect for those around you, group disruptions accepted as par for the course, dress and speech that would get one ejected from many restaurants, violence and a catering to the LCD. It is done in the name of tolerance, equality and fairness. I do not see the virtue in asking a 5-16 year old to negotiate such an environment if one has other options. Would you (the generic ‘you’ not the particular poster) voluntarily place your adult self in such an environment - given other choices?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think not. But the local communities generally tax themselves to provide these things, or have “boosters” or private donations or whatever.</p>
<p>I’m thinking the poor areas of Dallas that depend mainly on state taxes and significantly lower property taxes do not have these kinds of facilities…is that right?</p>
<p>I only read page one of this thread… and didn’t want to read every single post. I KNOW I will offend many here, but here goes…</p>
<p>My dd14 goes to a schoo(inner cityl where girls are allowed to stay while they are pregnant. Every time I see a 14yo,15yo etc with a large belly… its like a punch to the gut. I just can’t wrap my brain around the fact that these girls are allowed to stay in school and be a distraction/have their bellies rubbed/have signs posted for baby showers… yada yada yada yada… its like a badge of honor/rite of passage for many inner city girls… and I think its disgusting… especially in MY community(it may be different in YOUR community so please don’t lecture me)… these girls will soon find that said father(if they know who the father is) is far too immature to take care of a child and will be on to the next girl before the OB nurses can say “Push”… </p>
<p>Here in New Haven, the girls have a school for pregnant girls, but they decide to stay in their original schools so they can be with their friends, still take the classes that they want and not have the so called apple cart disturbed(when I was a teen here in New Haven, this wasn’t an option, the girls were made to leave school and go to the pregnant girls school)… I think this society has made teen motherhood a romantic/story book notion… and it makes me so sick… </p>
<p>These girls and their children will become burdens to the tax payers, will have less than mediocre lives, will face abject poverty, will more than likely be high school drop outs, more often than not will raise juvenile delinquents who will then further burden our society… should I continue???</p>
<p>It needs to be made very clear to our young girls that THEY choose to either get pregnant or not… its THEIR body and the blame/resposiblity should be placed on THEIR shoulders!!! Why should they rely on a boy, one whom can barely take out the family trash in a timely manner, to be responsible enough to prevent pregnancy? Will his life be impacted should a pregnancy occur? HELL NO! Is it fair??? NO… but life isn’t fair is it? Because when its all said and done… SHE will be stuck with the children…I have seen it happen far too many times! These girls have this notion of LOVE & think the boys will be with them for an eternity… when all he wants is the loins…and thats it… so it behooves young women to take care of themselves and not put the onous(sp??) on anyone else… </p>
<p>I have taught my own daughter this… and have always told her that the body that she was born with is all that she gets… and she should be very careful to whom she gives her uterus to!!! And lets not discuss HIV… the numbers are rampant for those is this age group and here again, young women MUST arm themselves and not expect someone else to care enough about them/their futures and protect themselves!! End of rant/off my soapbox…</p>