Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » A Formula for Failure in L.A. Schools (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: A Formula for Failure in L.A. Schools
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LATimes

quote:
Of all the obstacles to graduation, algebra was the most daunting.

The course that traditionally distinguished the college-bound from others has denied vast numbers of students a high school diploma.

"It triggers dropouts more than any single subject," said Los Angeles schools Supt. Roy Romer. "I think it is a cumulative failure of our ability to teach math adequately in the public school system."

When the Los Angeles Board of Education approved tougher graduation requirements that went into effect in 2003, the intention was to give kids a better education and groom more graduates for college and high-level jobs. For the first time, students had to pass a year of algebra and a year of geometry or an equivalent class to earn diplomas.

The policy was born of a worthy goal but has proved disastrous for students unprepared to meet the new demands.

In the fall of 2004, 48,000 ninth-graders took beginning algebra; 44% flunked, nearly twice the failure rate as in English. Seventeen percent finished with Ds.

In all, the district that semester handed out Ds and Fs to 29,000 beginning algebra students — enough to fill eight high schools the size of Birmingham.

Among those who repeated the class in the spring, nearly three-quarters flunked again.

The school district could have seen this coming if officials had looked at the huge numbers of high school students failing basic math.

You would think that they would try to get them caught up rather than just have them take the same class over again

quote:
Educational psychologists say reenrolling such students in algebra decreases their chances of graduating.

"Repeated failure makes kids think they can't do the work. And when they can't do the work, they say, 'I'm out of here,' " said Andrew Porter, director of the Learning Sciences Institute at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

The strategy has also failed to provide students with what they need most: a review of basic math.

Teachers complain that they have no time for remediation, that the rapid pace mandated by the district leaves behind students like Tina Norwood, 15, who is failing beginning algebra for the third time.

Does it even matter?

quote:
After dropping out, Gabriela found a $7-an-hour job at a Subway sandwich shop in Encino. She needed little math because the cash register calculated change. But she discovered the cost of not earning a diploma.

"I don't want to be there no more," she said, her eyes watering from raw onions, shortly before she quit to enroll in a training program to become a medical assistant.

Could passing algebra have changed Gabriela's future? Most educators would say yes.

Algebra, they insist, can mean the difference between menial work and high-level careers. High school students can't get into most four-year colleges without it. And the U.S. Department of Education says success in algebra II and other higher-level math is strongly associated with college completion.

Apprenticeship programs for electricians, plumbers and refrigerator technicians require algebra, which is useful in calculating needed amounts of piping and electrical wiring.

"If you want to work in the real world, if you want to wire buildings and plumb buildings, that's when it requires algebra," said Don Davis, executive director of the Electrical Training Institute, which runs apprenticeship programs for union electricians in Los Angeles.

Apparently the answer is yes, so why aren't they trying to do it in a way that works?

quote:
Cleveland High, four miles from Birmingham, places ninth- and 10th-graders who get a D or F in algebra into semester-long classes that focus on sixth- and seventh-grade material and pre-algebra. Students then return to standard algebra classes.

Eighteen percent of Cleveland's 10th-graders were proficient in algebra on state tests last spring, compared with 8% at Birmingham and 3% districtwide.

But Cleveland's strategy comes with risk. The state can lower the academic rankings of schools that remove ninth graders from first-year algebra. Consistently low rankings can invite district audits and penalties, including removal of teachers and administrators.

The state will punish schools that try to actually teach their students?
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Teacher Franklin Montiel said a few of his math students, who had low test scores but had mastered the material, were bored, and he scrambled to find more challenging work for them. Others were struggling at about a third-grade level, still learning division and nowhere near ready for the algebra they will need to graduate."

There's your problem. Find out why they advanced beyond the third grade without division.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Cytania
Member
Member # 2598

 - posted      Profile for Cytania     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah, Islamic culture's gift to the world of math - algebra.
Posts: 743 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"The policy was born of a worthy goal but has proved disastrous for students unprepared to meet the new demands."

In other words, it seperates the wheat from the chaff, as education is supposed to do. If the bar is raised and some people choose not to rise to the challenge, they'll learn from it or fail. Simple stuff.

And really, the Drake is right: why are they getting into classes they haven't proven themselves nearly competent to take? I think we need to start abolishing grade levels -- you move up when you learn the material and can prove you understand it, no sooner and no later.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
"Teacher Franklin Montiel said a few of his math students, who had low test scores but had mastered the material, were bored, and he scrambled to find more challenging work for them. Others were struggling at about a third-grade level, still learning division and nowhere near ready for the algebra they will need to graduate."

There's your problem. Find out why they advanced beyond the third grade without division.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing that a part of it is that they made all of these changes at the same time rather than phasing them in as the students advanced. In elementary the results are pretty good, and their high school results should be better when those kids get there, but the current high schoolers had a very different elementary experience.
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ivan
Member
Member # 1467

 - posted      Profile for Ivan   Email Ivan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
In other words, it seperates the wheat from the chaff, as education is supposed to do.
That's a rather warped view of education. I always thought the purpose of public education was to give all students the basic knoweldge they'll need to survive in the world.

[ February 01, 2006, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: Ivan ]

Posts: 1710 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lifewish
Member
Member # 1063

 - posted      Profile for Lifewish   Email Lifewish   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've seen this basic problem with algebra quite a lot. Kids firstly don't have it explained to them very clearly to start with, and secondly never manage to internalise it. And then they never realise that they didn't get it, and no-one else does either, and they get given problems that they should know how to solve but don't and that makes them think that they're thick. Which sucks.

I've been doing small amounts of maths tuition for a while now and I keep hitting this same problem. The only solution I've found is to figure exactly where they start to fall down (which is often as early as distributivity - the idea that a(b+c)=ab+ac) then drill them relentlessly in very very basic examples of it for ages. Work up to more complicated examples without introducing any new concepts, to build up confidence. Then introduce the next concept (indices maybe) and proceed as before. Pretty much what Cleveland is doing, in fact.

Posts: 272 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lifewish
Member
Member # 1063

 - posted      Profile for Lifewish   Email Lifewish   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
In other words, it seperates the wheat from the chaff, as education is supposed to do. If the bar is raised and some people choose not to rise to the challenge, they'll learn from it or fail. Simple stuff.
The purpose of education is to turn chaff into wheat. Putting kids off algebra for life is not a good way of achieving this goal, and that's apparently what's happening here.
Posts: 272 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adjudicator
Member
Member # 724

 - posted      Profile for Adjudicator   Email Adjudicator   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The problem is that "education" has several different divergent goals to meet.

One of those goals is to allow exceptional students to excel.

One goal is to give average students a decent exposure to a wide range of useful skills.

One of those goals is to work with poor students to help them achieve minimum standards.

The great failing of education is the lack of ability (and often will) to separate the students based on skill level rather than grade level, and the lack of classes which do anything but teach to one segment of the three mentioned (and obviously further divisions are possible). This leaves the other two groups alternatively bored, frustrated, undertaught etc.

Posts: 1172 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LoverOfJoy
Member
Member # 157

 - posted      Profile for LoverOfJoy   Email LoverOfJoy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And the U.S. Department of Education says success in algebra II and other higher-level math is strongly associated with college completion.
Algebra II is high-level math? I can't remember...I think I had that in 7th grade. What exactly is the difference between algebra I and algebra II? Is there a uniform cutoff point between the two?

The thing I remember about algebra in school is that it seemed like the last of the "everyday" math. After algebra, math seemed to be useful in only certain fields of study or circumstances. Tons of occupations don't use trigonometry or calculus but people use algebra all the time in simple day to day things like cooking.

Basic math just seems so important that if they aren't getting it by middle school I'd prefer that the kids get an extra remedial math class than have art or gym.

Posts: 3639 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lifewish said:
quote:
The purpose of education is to turn chaff into wheat. Putting kids off algebra for life is not a good way of achieving this goal, and that's apparently what's happening here.
If a person cannot hack a class, they should seek help. If a person is attempting to learn algebra but cannot do division, then it is probably time to either retake the course when they have more understanding, or to seek extra help.

It should not be the responsibility of a teacher attempting to teach algebra to teach division too. It slows the class down, and is inconsistent with the goal of the class (not to 'advance everyone', but to 'teach algebra')

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"t should not be the responsibility of a teacher attempting to teach algebra to teach division too. It slows the class down, and is inconsistent with the goal of the class (not to 'advance everyone', but to 'teach algebra')"

Agreed. Teachers need a greater ability to hold kids back until they can demonstrate that they understand the course material they are supposed to be learning.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jordan
Member
Member # 2159

 - posted      Profile for Jordan   Email Jordan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If anyone is up for teaching an ignorant foreigner: how are students divided into ability groups in the American education system, and how many groups are there? Would better streaming improve results?

I remember having severe problems in England because our Maths lessons were intolerably slow. Pupils were streamed into three sets, which wasn't nearly enough to avoid boring very good students, or leaving poorer students behind.

Scotland is rather different. Students can sit exams at three levels: Foundation, General and Credit. Each of these is further divided into two bands (ie. possible grades), ranging from Credit 1 and 2 to Foundation 5 and 6. At my academy, there were five distinct sets, since the Foundation pupils were consolidated into one group. Extremely good students went into the Credit 1 set, good students into Credit 2, high average into General 3 and so on. Credit students sat the general paper as well as a fallback, General students could sit Credit and General if they were reasonably good, or General and Foundation if there was any doubt. Foundation students missed many of the advanced topics, but everyone got to learn at least basic algebra. Lessons were paced according to how the class was progressing, and there were different standards according to how much material was covered.

Another shocking thing in England was that some 16 year-old Double Maths students didn't know how to do long division, which we learned when we were 9! So maybe some of the responsibility lies with earlier schooling...

[ February 01, 2006, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Jordan ]

Posts: 2147 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
that brings up a good point. Algebra is a graduation requirement. If a student knows they aren't going follow a math course, why can't they spend three years catching up on the division, and then nail the Algebra in final year?
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
First, all that should be required to achieve a diploma is first year algebra and basic euclidian geometry. That's all most people need to know.


Second...why the hell are these kids in algebra? Aren't they using some sort of placement tests? They've got four years to accomplish the goal.

On the plus side, in regard to our local politics, the mayor of LA is set to pretty much take over the school district. The dropout rate is between 29 and 65%, depending on which of several sets of numbers you want to believe. Change is comming, unfortunately not soon enough for nearly a generation of kids.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I thought that this article was related enough to repost the entire article.
Link

quote:
Stupid in America
How Lack of Choice Cheats Our Kids Out of a Good Education
By JOHN STOSSEL

Jan. 13, 2006 — - "Stupid in America" is a nasty title for a program about public education, but some nasty things are going on in America's public schools and it's about time we face up to it.

Kids at New York's Abraham Lincoln High School told me their teachers are so dull students fall asleep in class. One student said, "You see kids all the time walking in the school smoking weed, you know. It's a normal thing here."

We tried to bring "20/20" cameras into New York City schools to see for ourselves and show you what's going on in the schools, but officials wouldn't allow it.

Washington, D.C., officials steered us to the best classrooms in their district.

We wanted to tape typical classrooms but were turned down in state after state.

Finally, school officials in Washington, D.C., allowed "20/20" to give cameras to a few students who were handpicked at two schools they'd handpicked. One was Woodrow Wilson High. Newsweek says it's one of the best schools in America. Yet what the students taped didn't inspire confidence.

One teacher didn't have control over the kids. Another "20/20" student cameraman videotaped a boy dancing wildly with his shirt off, in front of his teacher.

If you're like most American parents, you might think "These things don't happen at my kid's school." A Gallup Poll survey showed 76 percent of Americans were completely or somewhat satisfied with their kids' public school.

Education reformers like Kevin Chavous have a message for these parents: If you only knew.

Even though people in the suburbs might think their schools are great, Chavous says, "They're not. That's the thing and the test scores show that."

Chavous and many other education professionals say Americans don't know that their public schools, on the whole, just aren't that good. Because without competition, parents don't know what their kids might have had.

And while many people say, "We need to spend more money on our schools," there actually isn't a link between spending and student achievement.

Jay Greene, author of "Education Myths," points out that "If money were the solution, the problem would already be solved ... We've doubled per pupil spending, adjusting for inflation, over the last 30 years, and yet schools aren't better."

He's absolutely right. National graduation rates and achievement scores are flat, while spending on education has increased more than 100 percent since 1971. More money hasn't helped American kids.

Ben Chavis is a former public school principal who now runs an alternative charter school in Oakland, Calif., that spends thousands of dollars less per student than the surrounding public schools. He laughs at the public schools' complaints about money.

"That is the biggest lie in America. They waste money," he said.

To save money, Chavis asks the students to do things like keep the grounds picked up and set up for their own lunch. For gym class, his students often just run laps around the block. All of this means there's more money left over for teaching.

Even though he spends less money per student than the public schools do, Chavis pays his teachers more than what public school teachers earn. His school also thrives because the principal gets involved. Chavis shows up at every classroom and uses gimmicks like small cash payments for perfect attendance.

Since he took over four years ago, his school has gone from being among the worst in Oakland to being the best. His middle school has the highest test scores in the city.

"It's not about the money," he said.

He's confident that even kids who come from broken families and poor families will do well in his school. "Give me the poor kids, and I will outperform the wealthy kids who live in the hills. And we do it," he said.

Monopoly Kills Innovation and Cheats Kids

Chavis's charter school is an example of how a little innovation can create a school that can change kids' lives. You don't get innovation without competition.

To give you an idea of how competitive American schools are and how U.S. students performed compared with their European counterparts, we gave parts of an international test to some high school students in Belgium and in New Jersey.

Belgian kids cleaned the American kids' clocks, and called them "stupid."

We didn't pick smart kids to test in Europe and dumb kids in the United States. The American students attend an above-average school in New Jersey, and New Jersey's kids have test scores that are above average for America.

Lov Patel, the boy who got the highest score among the American students, told me, "I'm shocked, because it just shows how advanced they are compared to us."

The Belgian students didn't perform better because they're smarter than American students. They performed better because their schools are better. At age 10, American students take an international test and score well above the international average. But by age 15, when students from 40 countries are tested, the Americans place 25th.

American schools don't teach as well as schools in other countries because they are government monopolies, and monopolies don't have much incentive to compete. In Belgium, by contrast, the money is attached to the kids -- it's a kind of voucher system. Government funds education -- at many different kinds of schools -- but if a school can't attract students, it goes out of business.

Belgian school principal Kaat Vandensavel told us she works hard to impress parents.

She told us, "If we don't offer them what they want for their child, they won't come to our school." She constantly improves the teaching, saying, "You can't afford 10 teachers out of 160 that don't do their work, because the clients will know, and won't come to you again."

"That's normal in Western Europe," Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby told me. "If schools don't perform well, a parent would never be trapped in that school in the same way you could be trapped in the U.S."

Last week Florida's Supreme Court shut down "opportunity scholarships," Florida's small attempt at competition. Public money can't be spent on private schools, said the court, because the state constitution commands the funding only of "uniform . . . high-quality" schools. Government schools are neither uniform nor high-quality, and without competition, no new teaching plan or No Child Left Behind law will get the monopoly to serve its customers well.

The longer kids stay in American schools, the worse they do in international competition. They do worse than kids from poorer countries that spend much less money on education, ranking behind not only Belgium but also Poland, the Czech Republic and South Korea.

This should come as no surprise if you remember that public education in the United States is a government monopoly. Don't like your public school? Tough. The school is terrible? Tough. Your taxes fund that school regardless of whether it's good or bad. That's why government monopolies routinely fail their customers. Union-dominated monopolies are even worse.

In New York City, it's "just about impossible" to fire a bad teacher, says Schools Chancellor Joel Klein. The new union contract offers some relief, but it's still about 200 pages of bureaucracy. "We tolerate mediocrity," said Klein, because "people get paid the same, whether they're outstanding, average or way below average."

Here's just one example from New York City: It took years to fire a teacher who sent sexually oriented e-mails to "Cutie 101," a 16-year-old student. Klein said, "He hasn't taught, but we have had to pay him, because that's what's required under the contract."

Only after six years of litigation were they able to fire him. In the meantime, they paid the teacher more than $300,000. Klein said he employs dozens of teachers who he's afraid to let near the kids, so he has them sit in what are called rubber rooms. This year he will spend $20 million dollars to warehouse teachers in five rubber rooms. It's an alternative to firing them. In the last four years, only two teachers out of 80,000 were fired for incompetence. Klein's office says the new contract will make it easier to get rid of sex offenders, but it will still be difficult to fire incompetent teachers.

When I confronted Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers, she said, "They [the NYC school board] just don't want to do the work that's entailed." But the "work that's entailed" is so onerous that most principals just have just given up, or gotten bad teachers to transfer to another school. They even have a name for it: "the dance of the lemons."

Zoned Out of a Good Education

I talked with 18-year-old Dorian Cain in South Carolina, who was still struggling to read a single sentence in a first-grade level book when I met him. Although his public schools had spent nearly $100,000 on him over 12 years, he still couldn't read.

So "20/20" sent Dorian to a private learning center, Sylvan, to see if teachers there could teach Dorian to read when the South Carolina public schools failed to.

Using computers and workbooks, Dorian's reading went up two grade levels -- after just 72 hours of instruction.

His mother, Gena Cain, is thrilled with Dorian's progress but disappointed with his public schools. "With Sylvan, it's a huge improvement. And they're doing what they're supposed to do. They're on point. But I can't say the same for the public schools," she said.

Lying to Beat the System

Gena Cain, like most parents, doesn't have a choice which public school her kids attend. She followed the rules, and her son paid the price.

In San Jose, Calif., some parents break the rules to get their kids into Fremont Union schools. They're so much better than neighboring schools that parents sometimes cheat to get their kids in by pretending to live in the school district.

"We have maybe hundreds of kids who are here illegally, under false pretenses," said District Superintendent Steve Rowley.

Inspector John Lozano works for the district going door-to-door to check if kids really live where they say they live. And even seeing that a child is present at a particular address isn't enough. Lozano says he needs to look inside the house to make sure the student really lives there.

Think about what he's doing. The school district police send him into your daughter's bedroom. He even goes through drawers and closets if he has to.

At one house he found a computer and some teen magazines and pictures of a student with her friends. He decided that student passed the residency test.

But a grandmother who listed an address in his district is caught. The people who answered the door when Lozano visited told him she didn't live there.

Two days later, I talked with the grandmother who tried to get her grandson into the Fremont schools.

"I was actually crying. I was crying in front of this 14-year-old. Why can't they just let parents to get in the school of their choice?" she asked.

Why can't she make a choice? It's sad that school officials force her to go to the black market to get her grandson a better education. After we started calling the school, the school did decide to let him stay in the district.

School-Choice Proponents Meet Resistance

When the Sanford family moved from Charleston to Columbia, S.C., the family had a big concern: Where would the kids go to school? In most places, you must attend the public school in the zone where you live, but the middle school near the Sanford's new home was rated below average.

It turned out, however, that this didn't pose a problem for this family, because the reason the Sanfords moved to Columbia was that Mark Sanford had been elected governor. He and his wife were invited to send their kids to schools in better districts.

Sanford realized how unfair the system was. "If you can buy a $250,000 or $300,000 house, you're gonna get some great public education," Gov. Sanford said. Or if you have political connections.

The Sanfords decided it was unfair to take advantage of their position as "first family" and ended up sending their kids to private school. "It's too important to me to sacrifice their education. I get one shot at it. If I don't pay very close attention to how my boys get educated then I've lost an opportunity to make them the best they can be in this world," Jenny Sanford said.

The governor then proposed giving every parent in South Carolina that kind of choice, regardless of where they lived or whether they made a lot of money. He said state tax credits should help parents pay for private schools. Then they would have a choice.

"The public has to know that there's an alternative there. It's just like, do you get a Sprint phone or an AT&T phone," Chavous said.

He's right. When monopolies rule, there is little choice, and little gets done. In America the phone company was once a government-supported monopoly. All the phones were black, and all the calls expensive. With competition, things have changed -- for the better. We pay less for phone calls. If we're unhappy with our phone service, we switch companies.

Why can't kids benefit from similar competition in education?

"People expect and demand choice in every other area of their life," Sanford said.

The governor announced his plan last year and many parents cheered the idea, but school boards, teachers unions and politicians objected. PTAs even sent kids home with a letter saying, "Contact your legislator. How can we spend state money on something that hasn't been proven?"

A lot of people say education tax credits and vouchers are a terrible idea, that they'll drain money from public schools and give it to private ones.

Last week's Florida court ruling against vouchers came after teacher Ruth Holmes Cameron and advocacy groups brought a suit to block the program.

"To say that competition is going to improve education? It's just not gonna work. You know competition is not for children. It's not for human beings. It's not for public education. It never has been, it never will be," Holmes said.

Why not? Would you keep going back to a restaurant that served you a bad meal? Or a barber that gave you a bad haircut? What if the government assigned you to "your" grocery store. The store wouldn't have to compete for your business, and it would soon sell spoiled milk or stock only high profit items. Real estate agencies would sell houses advertising "neighborhood with a good grocery store." That's insane, and yet that's what America does with public schools.

Chavous, who has worked to get more school choice in Washington, D.C., said, "Choice to me is the only way. I believe that we can force the system from an external vantage point to change itself. It will never change itself from within. ... Unless there is some competition infused in the equation, unless that occurs, then they know they have a captive monopoly that they can continue to dominate."

Competition inspires people to do what we didn't think we could do. If people got to choose their kids' school, education options would be endless. There could soon be technology schools, science schools, virtual schools where you learn at home on your computer, sports schools, music schools, schools that go all year, schools with uniforms, schools that open early and keep kids later, and, who knows what else. If there were competition, all kinds of new ideas would bloom.

--Firedrake
Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Joe Schmoe
Member
Member # 2640

 - posted      Profile for Joe Schmoe   Email Joe Schmoe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
nice article firedrake.
Posts: 214 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words, it seperates the wheat from the chaff, as education is supposed to do.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a rather warped view of education. I always thought the purpose of public education was to give all students the basic knoweldge they'll need to survive in the world.

It is a warped view. Warrsaw is conflating his personal philosophy with that of public education, which has never been about social darwinism.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm all for choice when we figure out that choice doesn't mean private schools. No way in hell am I paying tax dollars to the catholic church, and every school choice system proposed so far ends up with that happening.

We also have to realize that the economics of private schooling in this country is different then in western europe, and if we go to a voucher system that allows kids into private schools, we'll end up teaching some kids better then now, most kids the same as we are now, and more kids then now won't get any type of decent education because they won't be able to afford it.

What we need are schools equally as responsible to the state as current public schools, but that offer a variety of learning models.

Competition IS good, but competition also means that a lot of people get left behind, and thats not ok in schooling. So put forth an idea where schools can compete with each other, but we're not going to lose a lot of students to the cracks as they fail. Let that idea make certain that religious schools are not funded by tax payer dollars. And I'll support the idea.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I looked up Ben Chavis, the principal of the school above that pays teachers more, spends less per pupil, and gets better results. You can see why not everyone is doing things his way (but maybe they should be):

SFGate

quote:
In 2001, suffering from rapidly declining enrollment and low test scores, the school came under the direction of Ben Chavis, a former faculty member at San Francisco State University.

His tactics -- an old-fashioned, back-to-basics teaching model paired with an unorthodox discipline policy -- drove the school's evolution and created controversy.

"I don't care what the critics say, because the critics aren't turning schools around," Chavis said in his characteristically caustic tone. "You don't contact me when a school starts. You come to me when it's (expletive) up."

quote:
Those with good grades and perfect attendance all year are rewarded with spending money from Chavis' own pocket -- up to $100 depending on the student's age. Breaking a school rule, such as not completing homework, being tardy or breaking the dress code, means an automatic detention.

Repeat offenders are subject to public embarrassment. Those students must stand in front of other classes as Chavis or a teacher exposes their misconduct.

"An eighth-grader hates to be sent back to a sixth-grade class," Chavis said. "I want them to be embarrassed. I'm preparing them for the real world."

But it's the most extreme forms of discipline that have thrown the school into the critics' line of fire.

With parental permission, Chavis cut the hair of a student accused of stealing. A boy who admitted to calling his classmate a derogatory name was pinned with a note that read "I'm an (expletive)" in front of other students.

quote:
Some take issue with what they call Chavis' inappropriate use of racial stereotypes, cursing and name-calling to embarrass students at the school. Floundering students become the public targets of labels like "stupid" and "lazy Mexican."

"I tell the students, if you don't do your work, people are going to call you a lazy Mexican. You're black, they expect you to be an idiot," said Chavis, who is Native American. "I use it to motivate the kids."

The school loses about 10 students a year. Chavis said most of them moved out of the area. Disgruntled parents say they and others were pushed out or became fed up with Chavis' inappropriate language and overly aggressive discipline.

Rachael Huang disagreed when her daughter was assigned to retake Algebra I in September. After a series of intense discussions with school administrators, she said her daughter came home with a list of other Oakland schools photocopied from the phone book.

She took the hint and removed both her daughters from the school.

Chavis admitted that he's prompted students to leave, saying that his method isn't for everyone. He said his target demographic is "ghetto, poor kids."

"I don't use that middle-class rhetoric. I don't believe in building self-esteem, fundraising, parent involvement," Chavis said. "My system is not for middle-class, upper-class whites."


quote:
Society "has created a system to make minorities stupid. It's not called prison; it's called middle school," Chavis said. "If you follow our model, you'll be a winner. By the time these kids are in ninth grade, I don't have to call them idiots anymore."

Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
WarrsawPact: In other words, it seperates the wheat from the chaff, as education is supposed to do.

Ivan: That's a rather warped view of education. I always thought the purpose of public education was to give all students the basic knoweldge they'll need to survive in the world.

Lifewish: The purpose of education is to turn chaff into wheat. Putting kids off algebra for life is not a good way of achieving this goal, and that's apparently what's happening here.

Adam Masterman: It is a warped view. Warrsaw is conflating his personal philosophy with that of public education, which has never been about social darwinism.

Hell no.

First of all, Ivan: if they're not picking up the material, they're not getting the information anyway. I propose a system whereby you advance exactly as quickly as you learn new material, at very least up through the topics of elementary school. You lear addition and subtraction, you show you can understand those concepts, you move up to decimals and fractions. You learn decimals and fractions, and as soon as you show you understand the concept, you move up to simple multiplication and division. No earlier. We won't move you up until you show you can handle it.

Can't read? You're only wasting your own time if you put off reading, because we won't advance you until you start to show proficiency with reading ad writing.

This way, we won't have social advancement in schools, whereby we push kids up a grade even if they don't have the proficiency just to keep them with other kids of their approximate age. Why hold back the smart kids? Why advance the challenged kids before they've had a chance to rise to the occasion? Why pile on new concepts that require them to understand the old concepts, if they haven't shown they really get the foundation?

This way, when a kid gets to algebra, he knows he's got two options:
1) He can either reject it and be put off of algebra for life... in which case he'll be stuck in algebra classes until he turns 18; or
2) He can learn the concepts thoroughly and quickly and move on.

There's no room for "being put off of algebra for life" in my system. But if you get to 18 and you have progressed step by step at your own pace, and you haven't grokked algebra... well, we weren't going to be able to teach you algebra by that point anyway. You're not looking too hot for any math-based subjects when you start looking forward to college.

Meanwhile, kids will probably be very advanced in whatever field really interests the heck out of them. They'll enter college with 12 AP credits in some subject. Kids who exhaust their opportunities in math (or whatever subject) in high school might start taking community college courses or branching out into electives to round out ther education, because they can afford to.

Adam: social darwinism may be a loaded term to charge me with, but let's ask ourselves why the model's being rejected in the first place. I think it represents how the university and job markets treat these kids anyway. If the students were rejecting math and repeating the same stuff over and over, what were their chances at an engineering degree in the first place?

Merely telling teachers to "try harder" won't solve the problem. You need a system whereby you don't disserve students of any level of ability. I think that keeping a kid in mandatory progression, but at their own pace, is the best way to make sure kids get the stuff before they move on to another subject. It's also an incentive for kids to learn as much as they can with the time that they have.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IrishTD
Member
Member # 2216

 - posted      Profile for IrishTD   Email IrishTD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
@ Everard
quote:
I'm all for choice when we figure out that choice doesn't mean private schools. No way in hell am I paying tax dollars to the catholic church, and every school choice system proposed so far ends up with that happening.
What about other schools with a religious affiliation?
Posts: 825 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Like, say, Notre Dame or Georgetown University? Students get choice at that point, and they also get federal aid.
Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IrishTD
Member
Member # 2216

 - posted      Profile for IrishTD   Email IrishTD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
WP:

I was more referring to K-12 education, but you certainly make a valid point on the higher ed.

Posts: 825 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jordan
Member
Member # 2159

 - posted      Profile for Jordan   Email Jordan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Warsaw: Hell yes!

I've always thought that would be the ideal solution for teaching children and even young adults; arrogant fool that I was, I decided I was probably the only person to consider such a model. What restrains me from advocating it openly is that I'm unsure about the logistics: how do you make sure there are teachers at every level, given how many levels there can be?

The best solution I've come up with involves some fairly complex staggering of lessons and periodic auditing, which I'm loath to describe; my own aversion to bureaucracy notwithstanding, I know that anyone who gets wind of it will probably dismiss me purely on the basis that it's unworkably complex and demanding for teachers (unlike the slick, quick, streamlined paragon we have now [Roll Eyes] ), thus obtaining the frission of delight which always ensues smashing someone's ideas into a pulp.

So I'd be extremely interested in knowing if you have any ideas of your own.

I never actually associated this idea with "social Darwinism" (or "separating the wheat from the chaff"). I deeply believe in maximising each individual child's potential, and I see this as the best way of exploiting education to move towards that goal; "humanism" would be a better term.

[ February 03, 2006, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Jordan ]

Posts: 2147 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I never actually associated this idea with "social Darwinism" (or "separating the wheat from the chaff"). I deeply believe in maximising each individual child's potential, and I see this as the best way of exploiting education to move towards that goal; "humanism" would be a better term.

Actually, WP's idea sounds like something I've thought we should do since I was in High School. And his description doesn't sound like "separating wheat from chaff" -- less so than our current system, I think.

At any rate, our college/university system in the U.S. is probably the best in the world judged by the sheer number of quality institutions we have. Why not make lower levels more like the upper levels? Remove the focus from grade level (although we need some metric to determine "average" progress) and place the focus on actual courses and prerequisites. Let children move faster or slower, or skip things they know or don't need. Lower level classes would need to actually teach material, rather than just act as warehouses for lower tracked children.

Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pickled shuttlecock
Member
Member # 1093

 - posted      Profile for pickled shuttlecock   Email pickled shuttlecock   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They can get away with not firing bad teachers precisely because lower classes often act as warehouses. If you made them actually teach stuff, you'd have to include provisions for offing the bad instructors.

I don't think the teachers' unions would ever go for that. They need to be smacked.

Posts: 1392 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ugh. I just had a really long post written out. I was foolin around in another Firefox window and it crashed all my Firefox windows. I hate it when that happens.
Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lifewish
Member
Member # 1063

 - posted      Profile for Lifewish   Email Lifewish   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Warrsaw Pact: yeah, I hate it when that happens. Any idea what it was that crashed it? I know that the Flash program for Firefox was dodgy at one point, in which case you might want to install the FlashBlock plugin.
Posts: 272 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Anyway, I have an idea about how this would work out.

At my university, we have an online system called Blackboard. Professors post all content to this one place for their courses, and the information can be as personalized (grades, emails, etc.) or as mass-distributed (course syllabi, assignments, changes in plans) as they like. You can even have discussion boards set up for each class (in one of my classes, all the homework centers around the forum).

Anyway, this could make for the foundations of a really great staggered learning system. A network could be set up that connects students with other students who are very near their level of advancement, and with tutors and more advanced students.

The one thing you need to make sure of in this system is that no kids fall nto a motivation gap. if they stop doing the work, the teachers and parents should be notified in short order (and confirmation of parent notification is necessary too). For a kid to show he's advancing (or trying to advance), he could do all manner of things: he could do some reading assignment and answer follow-up questions, do some homework for reinforcement, take pre-exam quizzes, schedule time with a tutor or in a lab through the school network, or contact the teacher directly. They will not advance with poor grades on the exams; they have to show they really understand the material. So now you have a feedback mechanism that keeps everyone honest and involved. If a kid's trying to rush through, he'll perform poorly on the exams (which should be difficult enough thhat only a kid who actually understands it can get through)

The only job for the teachers, then, is to provide the maximum number of ways for a student to attack the problem. They provide instruction in text and audio and video, homework, quizzes, links to extra materials on the internet and in the library, and their own personal time/office hours. That, and they have to create and grade exams that show the student really understands the material.

Three things that either wont work or will be more complicated under such a system:
1. team sports
2. bands
3. field trips

#1 and #2 require cooperative advancement and coordination; people have to be in the same place at the same time and can't altogether rise at their own speed, even if they get tutoring/training on the side. #3 is much more complicated by all those minors needing supervision; we can't guarantee students will be able to obtain that supervision unless there's place/time coordination. And I assume that field trips are planned to coincide with some part of the students' learning process, which means mass musing will be much more difficult or less useful to the process.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jordan
Member
Member # 2159

 - posted      Profile for Jordan   Email Jordan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Warrsaw: time for mental digestion (sleep), but for now I will spell your name correctly as a token of my gratitude. [Wink]
Posts: 2147 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"At age 10, American students take an international test and score well above the international average. But by age 15, when students from 40 countries are tested, the Americans place 25th."

So, elementary schools aren't Government Monopolies dominated by evil teachers unions bent on destroying our youth....

It just doesn't wash that the system is so flawed due to a lack of comepetion if it's doing so darn well for the first five years.

We all pay for public schools whether we put children in them or not. The tax payer with no children in the system has as much right to control how the system works as the taxpayer with children in the system. Those without children, in fact, often pay a good deal MORE to fund it.

The education of adolescents in this country is a dismal failure. We're doing a good job with those under 12 (always room for improvement) and a good job at the university level (same caveat).

So, if tenured profs and union grade school teachers are at least performing decently, how can we say that there is some conclusive proof that Unions or Lack Of Competition are the root of our problems?


Our public school system was the envy of much of the world for about 50 years, the 1920's through the 1970's. It was, for all intents and purposes, a government monopoly. For much of that period, most teachers were union members.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And it used to be that corporations were run from the top down, like a general over his troops. Back those days, American corporations were the envy of the world -- yet today, we have many companies who are doing incredibly well that don't operate the old way at all... and many of the old-style command-and-control corporations are suffering mightily.

We have different expectations for kids today, higher expectations, with a great degree of competition (it's insane what little kids are doing these days in the name of college competition; I fear the job market in a decade's time).
My old algebra 2 teacher never took algebra 2 in high school, but he got into UCLA. Today, you're maybe average if you're taking algebra 2 in your junior year... but you're more likely behind the pack.
-=-=-=-
Oh, and my last sentence up there says "mass musing." It's supposed to be "mass busing," but I think you guys got the idea anyway.
-=-=-=-
Lifewish:
quote:
Warrsaw Pact: yeah, I hate it when that happens. Any idea what it was that crashed it? I know that the Flash program for Firefox was dodgy at one point, in which case you might want to install the FlashBlock plugin.
Seems like every time I try to add photos in Facebook, Firefox crashes. I think it's not installing some ActiveX plugin. Internet Explorer works just fine for the purpose.

[ February 03, 2006, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: WarrsawPact ]

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That all depends on which pack you're in.

I'm no fan of tracking, at least of the involuntary sort, but the fact is that we still need to produce construction foremen and secretaries and film producers and chefs. The vast majority of our labor force does not now, and will not within our lifetimes, have a need for advanced algebra.

I'm not saying that those courses shouldn't be available, well taught, and of high quality. People who want to persue careers in the sciences, in engineering, or economics need to be prepared for and be able to compete for a future at challenging universities. In order for us to maintain an economic leadership role, their ability to compete in global market is critical, but they alone do not create an economy.

The thing is, and maybe this unique to the educational system here in CA (although I doubt that) I had plenty of friends with those interests who were challenged by AP courses and the opportunity to take courses at community colleges while in high school.

The problem isn't that we're failing to teach enough children how to perform differential equations...it's that we're creating a generation that can't fill out a 1040ez without employing a professional.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The solution is easy. Just pay teachers $100,000.00 a year. Then when people swamp teacher's colleges to become teachers, they'll start having to actually have standards. People will actually have to be intelligent to get into the profession. Seriously, ever noticed how people who end up in teaching are basically either saints or losers?

I'm being kind of facetious of course, but there is a grain of truth to what I'm saying. If you pay teachers like janitors, it's no surprise that you recruit from the bottom of the barrel. If you paid lawyers and doctors $20,000.00 a year, watch how fast the quality of medical and legal services would drop! [Smile]

Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have an associates degree which is totally irrelevant to my job, I have no high school diploma, and after two years at the same job I make more than a teacher in the LAUSD with a bachelors degree and 20 years senority.

Anyone want to argue that teachers aren't underpaid? [Smile]

By the way...right now on KCET...some appologist from the LAUSD is trying to convince me that the dropout rate isn't as much of a problem as it seems, since some people go on to get an adult diploma. Denial is an amazing thing.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The LAUSD is a joke. I would know. They skipped me two grades in one year and neglected to put me in the gifted program (let's hear it for racial quotas!). They put me in one classroom for only an hour or so per day, then expected me to do all the homework for that class in addition to the class I was already in the rest of the day.

Problem: they never even gave me the books to do all the homework for the extra class. I wasn't around for their math lessons and didn't have their math book, but I was expected to do their math homework. It was at that point that I lost faith in the school system --- even I could tell something was very wrong, that I was lost in the shuffle.

I was still trouncing all the third graders (though I was a first-grader) because, lo and behold, I was literate and could spell. There were some teachers there who were genuinely trying -- one of whom had tried to save my brother (7 years older than me) from the same despair I was feeling. We all had the sense that the district was FUBAR, she knew we were decent kids, and she knew our so-called educations were disservices visited upon us by an incompetent super-bureaucracy.
I must have developed some degree of arrogance there. Because I was a complete prick all the way through elementary school.

Luckily, my mom decided enough was enough and moved my brother and I the hell outta there. 15 miles and a new district can make all the difference in the world.

[ February 03, 2006, 11:54 PM: Message edited by: WarrsawPact ]

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
jasonr - The disparity between what teachers are paid and what they should be paid... I discussed that in this thread:
How much shold be sent on a kid per year of school. I think my plan there could also work with my plan here.

I also started another thread shortly thereafter where I made a long-winded suggestion that might actually work well with this system.

Put 'em all together.... hmmm... that'd be crazy.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Overall, the San Diego Unified School District is much better, although it's far from a shining example of how to do things, and it's worst schools are as bad as LAUSDs worst. There just aren't as many horrible schools (three, really, at the high school level, compare to the worst in LA) and there are a few that outcompete a lot of private schools.

Not that most of your suggestions are actually bad WP...but too me the simplest answer is breaking up massive school districts. You lose a little money when you lose the economy of scale in purchasing, but restoring local control (and I'm talking 1-3 high schools of 600-1,200 students per district, half a dozen middle schools tops, and no more than 12 elementary schools) takes the money out of school board races, prevents things like the unbelievable rudeness to parents at LAUSD school board meetings (I was stunned when I watched one on public acess TV) and generally helps to restore accountability.

The media doing their job doesn't hurt, either.

I'm no big believer in "golden ages" but we once had a system that worked fairly well. Of course, in CA, we once spent more than twice as much as we do now per pupil in real dollars, and our national ranking has slid exactly as our funding has fallen. "Throwing money" at diabeties doesn't solve a diabetics problems either, but kidney dialisis isn't free.

I don't see a downside with any of these things.

1) Not only higher teacher salaries, but more competition. Not just performanced based, but higher salaries for teachers comming from more respected universities, teachers who graduate on the honor role, teachers who are willing to teach in a war zone, ect. I'm not saying teachers unions need to go...but it sure wouldn't hurt to smack them around a litte.

2) Smaller school districts with a neighborhood focus. We've got schools where football is a fully funded school sport, and soccer is a club the kids have to raise all the funds for. That might make sense in most of the district, but when the school body is over 50% latino immigrants....yeah, just one example.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jesse:

Our public school system was the envy of much of the world for about 50 years, the 1920's through the 1970's. It was, for all intents and purposes, a government monopoly. For much of that period, most teachers were union members. [/QB]

For much of that period teachers were members of a professional association. It wasn't until the 60's that the NEA turned into a union. For most of its history it was a professional association that included administrators as well as teachers and did great things for education. Now it only does great things for teachers.
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1