Way off topic

Michael Davis · Apr 15, 2018

sailnoproblem said:
I just saw a advertisement for a On Line Charter School.

I hope that was to charter a virtual boat! Not much practical experience on line. I know what you mean about eye-contact. You see kids every day walking side by side texting each other.

dlochner · Apr 15, 2018

At the risk of delving into a hot political topic, I am not a big fan of charter schools for a number of reasons.

First, on the whole, charter schools are no better at educating kids than public schools. There are of course some exceptional charter schools and there are of course exceptional public schools, but for the most part outcomes are the same. The one advantage to charter schools is when they fail, they are easier to shut down.

Second, charter schools are typically funded in a way that disproportionally punishes public schools. Charter schools typically exist in or near metro areas, because they need a large enough school population to make them economically viable. Funding is typically based on the average per pupil cost in the local district and that money comes from the school district's budget, there is not additional money. So for every dollar the charter school gets the local school district loses a dollar. That sounds fine until you start to do the accounting. The cost to educate the first child who enters a school is astronomical, the cost to educate the last child is just pennies. If a child leaves a public school that may cost the school district $15K, but the actual cost to the district is just a few hundred dollars for consumable supplies, lunches and text books. Charter schools don't significantly reduce the public school district's need for teachers, staff, and buildings.

Third, charter schools only educate the easy to educate. They typically do not provide services to severely disabled students who are quite expensive to educate, costing many times the cost of the average student. They also don't provide support services, the local district still must provide psychologists to assess students for special education and some specialized services, such as occupational, physical and speech therapies are still provided by the local district.

Fourth, charter schools typically pay their staff less than the local school district. What kind of staff is willing to work for less money?

Fifth, my experience with charter schools is that they won't work with challenging students. They cherry pick students. Present academic or behavioral challenges to the school and you will get "counseled" out and back to the public schools. Leaving the public schools with the most difficult and expensive to educate.

Charter schools are nothing more than a way to funnel tax payer money to the private sector. One only needs to look at the disaster that is the Detroit school system that heavily invested in charter schools.

Over the past 30 years I have worked as a public school administrator and a school psychologist. The comments above reflect my experience and research with charter schools.

The bottom line is that in some places you can't have 2 masters. In the charter school system the responsibility is to the students and the share holders. Guess who has more influence.

Rant over.

TomY · Apr 15, 2018

sailnoproblem said:
I just saw a advertisement for a On Line Charter School. Now this is just my opinion but I feel today that the younger generation (Millennial's) have a hard time communicating face to face. I know they do just fine with a cell phone but eye contact is a different story. I feel that attending school both public and private also offer face to face contact and communication.
I have a feeling that in the not to distant future the most highly paid job will be that of a receptionist.
I would love to hear the opinion of all you teachers, past and present. Two of my children are teachers and both "somewhat" agree with me.

Most of the millennials I know (including my own), went to public schools, so I can't say much about charter schools. I have high praise for public schools from experience.

But my experience with millennials in general, is completely the opposite. They are the most face to face bunch I know!

Our son was home a few weeks ago for his birthday. Several of his male friends from high school, came over for lunch. 6 or 7 guys, 25-27 years old, sat around the table in the other room, and talked for more than an hour.

I sat in the next room (on my computer

), and just enjoyed their easy camaraderie. Gone is much of the male bravado from my generation. Sexism, racism, homophobia,...all gone by most measures.

It was a pleasure to listen to these polite young men enjoy each others company. College grads, non college, technical school. They acted as if they were in mixed company(they weren't aware I could hear). That's a good way for men to act, always.

But what I find unique above all is their support of each other. As a peer group, millennials spend a lot of time together, help each other in job connections, social connections, health problems, etc.

It's the same with our daughter (28) and her large group of friends, young men and women, from high school - college. She has a large group in NYC where she lives and works. They often go out together, as a group, or just get together for dinner at someones place.

It's different! It's one of the few things that I worry may be a problem. Some may become too dependent on this group support and struggle when they tend to follow the typical family path, we all have.

But I could be wrong there, maybe they will do things differently, as they tend to do.

Brian D · Apr 15, 2018

I have a similar problem with teachers. As a school photographer, I notice most (not all) teachers will drop their students off and then spend the time looking at their phone. Meanwhile, I can't communicate with my subject because of 1) the noise level, and 2) the kids are playing next to my light stands. Very dangerous. Sometimes I want to just go and take their phone away. But I can't. That would not be "professional" of me. Grrrrr.

Michael Davis · Apr 15, 2018

Brian D said:
I have a similar problem with teachers. As a school photographer, I notice most (not all) teachers will drop their students off and then spend the time looking at their phone

I'd bet that's just the young ones Brian. The old ones don't see much point staring at a rotary dial.

mcrow33 · Apr 15, 2018

Damn, I was all kind of confused. The only thing I could think of was a bareboat charter school, like ASA 104, and could not figure out how you could learn anything without hands on experience.

Gene Neill · Apr 15, 2018

My wife has tendered her resignation after 24 years teaching high school. She's trying to get on at Florida Virtual School (state run). It pays less, but she'll live longer and I'll get my wife back.

jssailem · Apr 15, 2018

sailnoproblem said:
you see individuals texting and not even looking at each other

Brian D said:
then spend the time looking at their phone.

This is likely just my own conspiracy theory, but the noise we have heard about Russian hackings, Facebook, Cambridge Analytica and voters is tied to the lack of critical thinking skills being taught to our youth.

To hear young educated individuals say they get their news from the Facebook internet, The Daily Show or The Colbert Report makes the voting future of our nation extraordinarily vulnerable.

I wonder what the phone could be telling them? Why are they addicted? Because Instagram, twitter, facebook, linkedin, etc.. is filling their minds and capturing their attention. I watched our young waiter the other day have a difficult time looking at the folks at the table when sharing todays specials. I thought at first we looked offensive. But she did it with every table she was serving. No one take the time to look you in the eye and communicate their thoughts. IT is somehow not safe to do. Better to retreat into the mini-screen.

Facebook reportedly is being challenged to use AI technology to monitor what is posted. Then provide ad content and news info that can modify the thinking of the user. If the user appears to be depressed then content would be provided that calms the user. Suggests the need for mutual support. Encourages contact with councilors and or makes contact with professionals and dispatches them to the location of the user. (Feels like the theme of the movie Minority Report - where authorities arrested individuals because a computer thought them may be dangerous in the future.)

I'm sure our parents were afraid of what we would become. Me I am frightened at what our future appears to be heading towards.

jssailem · Apr 15, 2018

Gene Neill said:
I'll get my wife back.

YEAY...

justsomeguy · Apr 15, 2018

jssailem said:
To hear young educated individuals say they get their news from the Facebook internet, The Daily Show or The Colbert Report makes the voting future of our nation extraordinarily vulnerable.

Except for Facebook (whatever that is

), the other two you've mentioned at least allow for a smile while digesting the insanity.

jssailem said:
Me I am frightened at what our future appears to be heading towards.

What can one do?

jssailem · Apr 15, 2018

justsomeguy said:
What can one do?

Decide My Problem - Not my Problem.
Go sailing and hope that enough work to pay the social security promised.

justsomeguy · Apr 15, 2018

jssailem said:
...hope that enough work to pay the social security promised.

That's it exactly.

jwing · Apr 16, 2018

sailnoproblem said:
Then again I am old so I guess that is my problem.

I was going to reply to your opening post with a similar sentiment, but you beat me to it.

My pet peeve is Gen-Xers, who have now risen management level positions among my clients. During meetings that they called for, they will answer their phones, check their tweets, or whatever the hell they do. That is the epitome of 'rude'. But they are my clients, so I bite my tongue and soldier on (just a few more years!). My phone gets turned OFF before I enter a meeting.

How people (lawfully) act when they are not interacting with me is of zero interest to me, regardless of to which 'generation' they belong.

dlochner · Apr 16, 2018

jssailem said:
This is likely just my own conspiracy theory, but the noise we have heard about Russian hackings, Facebook, Cambridge Analytica and voters is tied to the lack of critical thinking skills being taught to our youth.

To hear young educated individuals say they get their news from the Facebook internet, The Daily Show or The Colbert Report makes the voting future of our nation extraordinarily vulnerable.

@sailnoproblem led me to the rabbit hole, and now @jssailem has pushed me into it.

The assault on public education and teachers is one of those topics that it may be best not to get me started on.

The teaching of critical thinking skills is given lip service in the schools, but schools are not structured to teach critical thinking nor is there an incentive for teachers to teach those skills. Let me elaborate.

For long time schools have used various tests to measure student performance and school performance. The theory being, better schools have higher test scores. For years there was an appropriate level of interest in these scores and they were not the end all and be all. That changed under the Bush Administration with the passage of No Child Left Behind. Under NCLB, test scores were the primary measure of school quality and teacher effectiveness. Under the law, if a school or school district was not meeting specified goals based on school testing there were sanctions placed on the school, teachers' jobs were threatened, and federal aid could be cut. (That last one made a lot of sense to chronically underfunded urban school districts, he said sarcastically.)

The emphasis on test scores and the consequences of not meeting goals caused schools and teachers to teach only that which might be tested and not other important content or skills (like critical thinking). So, critical thinking skills took a back seat, because, it is very difficult to measure those skills, thus, they weren't tested or only in very cursory manner. Under NCLB the tests drove the curriculum. In the good old days, tests simply sampled the curriculum. In the old days, curriculum was developed independent of the test. Under NCLB, the curriculum only covered what was going to be tested.

If your job performance is going to be judged by a test, then you better be teaching the test, the hell with anything that might be interesting or useful if it isn't going to be tested. There is a certain appealing logic to the notion that teacher ratings and retention should be based on student test performance, but that logic is naive and faulty. First, the tests are meaningless to students. There are virtually no consequences for the student, regardless of their performance. The student does well, nothing happens. The student does poorly, nothing happens. If the class does poorly something bad happens to the teacher, if the class does well, something good might happen to the teacher. Second, the best predictor of a student's test score are parent income and parent education. Teacher quality accounts for only about 25% of the a student's test score. (For the statistical geeks, that's 25% of the variance associated with test performance.)

There is also the practical matter that there is very little consensus on how to teach critical thinking. And sometimes trying to teach it can get a teacher into trouble. One method of teaching critical thinking, and one used by debate clubs), is for the student to take and defend a position that is not commonly accepted or is not the student's own opinion. For example, a climate change denier might be asked to argue that climate change is real and caused by humans. Recently there was a teacher who found himself in the national spotlight after assigning students a critical thinking essay. Students were asked to write an essay defending the holocaust and the killing of Jews. This did not go over well with students, parents, and ultimately school officials. Understanding the thinking of those behind the holocaust is important so that we can see the signs and prevent future genocides and taking a position that is contrary one's belief is a good way to develop critical thinking and understanding of others. Given the outcome, how likely is this teacher to engage his students in critical thinking exercises in the future? Not very I'd venture. (It is also important to note, that from what I read, while the teacher had good intentions, I don't think he handled the assignment very well. It was put in a way that was offensive to many. The same goals could have been met by wording and structuring the assignment in a different, less offensive manner.)

Finally, there is a well funded group of political supporters who do not want the populace to think critically about important issues. You can hear it in the attacks on the "liberal elites" in colleges, the denigration of teachers over the past 20 years, the support for privatizing education and so forth. If we are to critically examine many of the claims made by politicians, we would see those claims as the shams that they are. And then we would vote them out of office. Propaganda will fail in the light of critical analysis, so let us keep the populace in the dark.

Thanks for reading this far. I warned you that this was a rabbit hole, and we're only in the first tunnel.

DougM · Apr 16, 2018

This is my opinion, unsubtanciated by fact.
I believe that home schooling in most cases is a far worse problem than charter schools,
Home schooling for the most part isolates the students from any meaningful social interaction. Other than the basics, students are likely to be exposed to a very biased version of any historical or political subject. The teacher/parent in the vast majority of cases is not a qualified educator, and there is no set schedule or routine similar to that which might be encountered in a workplace environment.
(for the record, my wife was a public high school teacher for 34 yeq

dlochner · Apr 16, 2018

DougM said:
This is my opinion, unsubtanciated by fact.
I believe that home schooling in most cases is a far worse problem than charter schools,
Home schooling for the most part isolates the students from any meaningful social interaction. Other than the basics, students are likely to be exposed to a very biased version of any historical or political subject. The teacher/parent in the vast majority of cases is not a qualified educator, and there is no set schedule or routine similar to that which might be encountered in a workplace environment.
(for the record, my wife was a public high school teacher for 34 yeq

Over the course of my career I have had the opportunity to work with students from a variety of backgrounds and school situations. Home schooling would be very low on my list of desirable educational settings unless the parents are highly motivated, educated and engaged in a sailing adventure around the world. Those parents who do home school, are often unprepared for the demands, especially as the child grows older and enters the high school curriculum. Home schoolers often do not have the resources to provide the kind of education that is available in public schools or larger parochial and private schools; think chemistry labs, biology labs, etc.