<p><a href=“http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101050221/story.html?promoid=AOL[/url]”>http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101050221/story.html?promoid=AOL</a></p>
<p>Noooo! I got to the part with the two skeletons, and it told me to subscribe in order to finish the article. What happened next?</p>
<p>Yeah, I got to the same part.</p>
<p>Let me guess: the parent comes in, furious at the teacher for having disrupted the child’s carefully indoctrinated religious beliefs. The school district then gets sued and loses the case, since it has not sucessfully separated religion and state. Naturally, the teacher then is fired for teaching the “theory” of anatomy without teaching the biblical version as well.</p>
<p>(In the story of Adam and Eve, Eve is created from one of Adam’s ribs. Therefore, Adam should be missing a rib.)</p>
<p>LOL, Tanstaafl! Good guess!</p>
<p>try this link, I read it earlier today—then emailed it to a teacher friend.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.time.com/time/subscriber/covers/1101050221/story.html[/url]”>http://www.time.com/time/subscriber/covers/1101050221/story.html</a></p>
<p>No go–again, requires subscription. Could you summarize the highlights?</p>
<p>The kid’s pastor or priest gets involved and blasts the teacher! LOL What state did this happen in, Kansas?</p>
<p>Highlights of the article:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Teachers love interacting with students and hate interacting with their parents. Many examples are given in which parents “blindly” support children with problems with discipline (regarding a discipline problem with a student, one teacher mentions a father wanting to “settle this man-to-man”)</p></li>
<li><p>Reasons for what many teachers feel as a lack of respect from parents: middle class parents have more socially valued jobs and look down on teachers; pressure from parents on kids stemming from unreasonable expectations</p></li>
<li><p>Three types of stereotypical parents feared by teachers are mentioned: “helicoptor parents” (pretty self-explanatory) who are there to help their children out at the first sign of trouble; “monster parents” who seem to be just waiting for a teacher to make a mistake; and “dry-cleaner parents” who expect the school system to pretty much take care of their children for them. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>There is one particular part that I think is quite a good description of the helicopter parents. It describes a set of mothers at a small town (I believe in north carolina) who come to school to watch their high school seniors having their last lunch in the cafeteria. One student tells his mom to go home and “get a life,” to which she replies, “you are my life, my dear.”</p>
<p>There are some truths in the article, but Time has reached a new low by publishing such a shoddy, one-sided, poorly researched piece. It is not too different from the typical article you read about parents misbehaving at soccer games, where thousands of parents behave very well while suffering from the incompetence of refs protected by a administration run by misfits. Rather than even trying to listen to the parents and players and identify the issues that cause the problems, the administration seeks more enforcement. </p>
<p>In this case, at no time do the multiple interviewers and editors bothered to ask WHY did parents acted that way. They simply painted them in the darkest possible way. They even found a way to criticize parents’ volunteerism by deriding the action as obstrusive and self-serving. </p>
<p>I do no doubt that over-involved parents exist and that some do cause problems. However, a magazine of the calibre of Time should at least try to present a balanced analysis. Our education system is filled with wonderful teachers and parents that are extremely supportive … from a distance. For every helicopter or parent-of-hell, one could find a lazy and irresponsive teacher. Every once in while, our educators should remember that parents do not abdicate their parental priviledges at 8 in the morning. They may also remember that it is parenst who pay for the education and their jobs, be in the form of taxes or direct tuitions. </p>
<p>Openess, responsiveness and accountability by the schools would eliminate most of the reported problems. People have a great ability to differentiate the idiots from the well-meaning parents. Just as in the soccer games, the idiots who yell from the top of their lungs are quickly ostracized by the remaining parents. On the other hand, when negative reactions seem universal, the reason of the problems are mostly identified on the other side of the fence.</p>
<p><em>Very</em> fine post, Xiggi. I would only quibble with you regarding the remark, “a magazine of the caliber [ahem] of Time…”</p>
<p>The last time I saw Time show any balance, moderation, research (you note) – in other words, actual <em>journalism</em> as opposed to sensationalism, superficiality & cliches – was maybe when I was a child. I barely remember when they used to not sound like a tabloid.</p>
<p>This is merely another piece replete with sloppy generalizations. I’ve read more mature prose from 5th graders. And I’ll take an over-involved parent over an under-involved parent (or teacher!) any day. (I am a teacher as well.) There are far, far more classroom, & societal, problems with youth today arising from under-involved than over-involved parents.</p>
<p>The only style of parent who really gets to me is the parent who seems to truly believe that it is a classroom of one student (theirs), or the ones so out of touch with reality that they are no less than delusional about their average children whom they magnify as images of the Divine. That is beyond annoying, because it affects the time a teacher can spend with & on other students – so demanding are those parents to ensure misplaced, universal admiration of theirs as some superior form of being (NOT!).</p>
<p>A teacher with a professional manner can re-direct an over-eager parent in a constructive way – even, sometimes, when the parent has an overt pathology. Much more of a struggle to convince “absent” parents that they can & should be at least engaged with education & communicating that to their children.</p>
<p>Thank you, Xiggi! I am once again reminded why I don’t get my news or social analysis from Time!</p>
<p>The full-page photo cover on the hard-copy TIME magazine of this issue IS HILARIOUS, though…look for it at the newsstand! (I am a teacher and can relate so well!)
Most of my room-parents are simply wonderful. But I could not agree more, epiphany…“The only style of parent who really gets to me is the parent who seems to truly believe that it is a classroom of one student (theirs), or the ones so out of touch with reality that they are no less than delusional about their average children whom they magnify as images of the Divine. That is beyond annoying, because it affects the time a teacher can spend with & on other students – so demanding are those parents to ensure misplaced, universal admiration of theirs as some superior form of being (NOT!).”</p>
<p>Personally, I think parents SHOULD be a little pushy. And I have even heard from principals who privately advocate to me doing so to get results for their child. Teachers are tired, many are poorly educated, in order to get that little zap of attention a phone call of concern, interest, helps. Of course I have seen parents who start trouble, argue. There is a successful way to handle interpersonal relationships.
I have had good results with all my teacher dealings. (However, one time my oldest developed hives from a teacher and the principal and I agreed he should be moved. Got straight A’s after the change!)
YOu see the thing to understand is that the people here on C.C. are generally above average- not what many run into in the world!</p>
<p>backhandgrip, there is a huge difference between “pushy” and “involved” parents. We teachers most definitely want the latter. Pushy parents do no one a favor. I’m a parent as well as a teacher, and I am VERY INVOLVED in my children’s education, but would not dare PUSH because I know how obnoxious pushy parents are.</p>
<p>I’m weary of parents stereotyping teachers as “tired and poorly educated.” If such parents would come do our jobs just for one day, they’d have more respect for the challenges that teachers meet daily.</p>
<p>I agree with Xiggi. </p>
<p>I also have seen lots of evidence that most schools have far more problems with parents who are not involved than the overinvolved parents the article described. What was in the article was clearly a phenomenon of schools serving students who come from well educated, well off homes.</p>
<p>In lower SES schools, the problems are that parents seem not to be involved at all. The schools end up virtually having to bribe parents to come to PTA meetings. Parents avoid teachers’ calls, and don’t show up for things like open houses.</p>
<p>I venture that problems of both extremes of parental behavior, from too pushy to too detached, would lessen in a system of voluntary choice of schooling. Horace Mann’s model of compulsory attendance (which led, through the Commonwealth v. Roberts decision, directly to segregated schools) should be abandoned, and we should return to voluntary participation in education offered by competing providers.</p>
<p>We have quite a few parents at my kids’ school who actually DO their homework…granted, they’re not high schoolers yet, but in the long run its not helping the student. Why can’t parents see that?</p>
<p>dke,
We had the identical situation all through elem/middle school. Usually it was projects instead of papers (art projects, science fairs, display boards, construction projects); quite blatant, & easily up to 1/4 of the parents every year would do this – & I do mean the WHOLE project. Several of us parents complained for several yrs; admin. & faculty never took action. I think it was an ego/vanity thing more than a rescue. (You’ll notice all the above involve public <em>displays</em>) But def. agree that one wonders how they’re doing in h.s.</p>
<p>tokenadult,
I don’t know about the elimination of compulsory, but for own State I can attest to the disastrous situation of at least 85% of our public schools. These failures are due mostly to the effects of an unwieldly & distant bureaucracy with political agendas & complex regulations as priorities, combined with extremes of heterogeneity within classrooms (ability, culture, language), making it impossible for a Messiah to teach effectively. In some regions parental apathy or absence plays a significant role, but overall, it is not the determining reason, if you look at the # of districts where there is positive parental involvement. </p>
<p>I think there should be “privatization” in the sense of divestiture. It would still have to have a “public” character in the matter of dollars provided, but the organization, curriculum, & administration of schooling could be locally determined & managed. I know that Charter schools have tried to address this, but one still has to get permission from Mommy-&-Daddy-gov’t. in that model.</p>
<p>There are plenty of alternative models to the current public school system, just not enough creative, determined minds willing to tackle it. There are many alternative systems. In our State, there are not enough spots in private schools to accommodate the overwhelming number of poorly performing public shools.</p>
<p>Epiphany, I can really relate to the whole science fair thing. You go to a middle school science fair, and see high-tech corporate presentation materials, and you really feel for the kids who did the projects themselves, with poster board and magic markers.</p>
<p>Then there is the content. I am extremely suspicious when I see projects that were done on million-dollar equipment only available in labs, at least in middle school.</p>
<p>I also am shocked - shocked!! - (apologies to “Casablanca”) to see how many science fair winners did projects * in a parent’s field. * That alone isn’t a problem - except when the parent thinks up the topic, does the research, gets the expert help and presentation materials, etc.</p>
<p>Do you all remember the 9 year old girl who supposedly was the youngest author of an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association? I believe it was on the efficacy of hypnotism - I’m not sure. What I DO remember was that her mother was a medical professional who had done research in the. Maybe it was just a ploy to get her kid into Harvard! :)</p>
<p>I should confess that I am even slightly suspicious of high school projects. I think the “mentors” - often PhDs in super expensive labs - should ALSO have their names on the project. I highly doubt that even some very bright high schoolers could really have made the cutting-edge discoveries that win national scholarships without a LOT of help.</p>
<p>This reminds me of the first national ROV (remote oceanic vehicle) competition, Our school’s team built an ROV with $50 plus the laundry bin donated by the coach. They went to the national competition site and were beaten by a Community College team that had spent $5k on their ROV. Getting to second place with their $50 contraption was sweet. The second year, they beat a team from MIT, which was just as sweet.</p>