Thread: No Child Left Behind: 'Widespread Demoralization Of Teachers And Students

Originally Posted by tsurara

I also grew up in the Regents Testing System. Meaning that I, myself, went through 3 years of high school doing nothing but studying for standardized testing. I did very well on those tests and recieved my regents diploma with honors. I STILL felt unprepared for university and as though I had learned nothing in high school. I can no longer recite basic multiplication tables...

... and you are teaching and received a diploma? Congratulations, you just proved my point on how bad the entry level to college has gotten.

Originally Posted by tsurara

material for tests is crammed and then forgotten.

And I went through without the standardized testing and kids cramming for finals then forgetting what they learned was what most did then as well. The difference was that there was no standardizing in requirements and we had a list of easy teachers and hard teachers based on how hard their tests were. I could get an A in an easy class knowing so little I would have gotten an F in a hard one.

Originally Posted by tsurara

The major difference between schools that succeed in education and those who do not boils down to three things:

-Funding available and it's distribution. When I was in school in the United States, I used a 5 year-old out of date textbook that had been written in by 5 previous students... my teachers often bought supplies out of their own pockets so that we would have materials to work with. We had to collect box tops to buy one computer every year and a majority of our school computers had black and white monitors... in 1998!

Funding? Hardly. Higher funding has shown to have no correlation with results. Crappy teaching won't get better results just because they are paid more. Some of the best educated primary educations in the world are done on a minuscule amount compared to what the US spends per student.

As for your old texts and computers, my heart bleeds. So what if your monitor was black and white, as long as you aren't doing art who cares. Old text books, so what? I had old text books as well. Fact is the older text books were better for learning the new ones were just pretty. In my opinion we would save a ton of money if we just stopped buying big, glossy, mugger beater, books and stuck with basic paperbacks with all the pertinent info. Each student could have their own and last I checked Math hasn't changed in over a millennia and English in over a century. All new text books do is encourage you to open them as little as possible so that you won't be fined for any damage done while using them at the end of the year.

Originally Posted by tsurara

Art and music education are constantly cut for lack of funding and ability to provide teachers the school board can actually pay.

Then maybe we should get rid of the Teachers Union and fire all the staff that are unnecessary but hold on to their jobs through Union sponsorship.

Originally Posted by tsurara

-The socio-economic background of the students. It's very difficult to teach students who do not want to learn... it's even more difficult to teach them when they see nothing at all practical to be learned from education. A child who lives in a neighborhood where people get shot daily probably isn't terribly concerned about his math grade. And parents dealing drugs or stripping certainly aren't going to provide any guidance at home.

As true as that is they have done studies and found to their surprise most students, even in the circumstances you describe, do want to learn. They just don't believe that they will actually be taught anything. I wonder why.

Originally Posted by tsurara

- The training, support and motivation of teachers. Teachers have argueably one of the most important jobs there is. Lately, it's also become one of the more dangerous and open to daily criticism from parents looking to scapegoat their children's failures on some outside source. There are plenty of awful teachers in the school-system, yes. But consideringthe average teacher makes less than the average hotel-chef, electrician or plumber; it's a bit difficult to convince the right sort of people to go into the field.

Electricians and plumbers have to pass certification exams and re-certify yearly. Then if the state board receives complaints about their inability they will be striped of their license. Yet you are here saying that teachers should be paid the same amount but not be held to any standards? Hah. The day that teachers have to pass yearly tests and any who fail to teach or don't uphold school standards are summarily fired is the day I will consider that point. Until then it's like crying because a bookkeeper doesn't make the same amount as an accountant.


This fuss over the accountability standards is a power scream and nothing else. The teachers union and federal organizations don't want to lose the power they have gained in the last 35 years and nothing more. There is no legitimate competition anymore so there is no incentive to do better. Take the money and give it to the parents to send the kids wherever they want. That way there would be full accountability for results. A school sucks? The parents who care will go somewhere else. Perhaps the fact that home schooled children consistently score in the top of the nation will be a wake up call as to how little children are actually learning in school.

"No child Left Behind"? Maybe not but it is a far cry from the old rallying cry, "No standard is too low if it allows every student to pass."

Originally Posted by Arrianna

... and you are teaching and received a diploma? Congratulations, you just proved my point on how bad the entry level to college has gotten.

I don't teach MATH. I also speak 3 languages, have travelled Asia, can fix your computer, type 80 words a minute, and probably know more about history than you ever will. All thanks, at least in part, to University.

You may be able to do basic multiplication without a calculator: but how many languages do you speak?

We go to college to learn useful skills relevant to our respective carrers: not general knowledge.

The point is, not all knowledge is necesarily useful to everyone. And what isn't useful, tends to atrophy.

Originally Posted by Arrianna

As for your old texts and computers, my heart bleeds. So what if your monitor was black and white, as long as you aren't doing art who cares. Old text books, so what? I had old text books as well.

When you're learning about history and your book ENDS with the Regan presidency... I would say that's a problem.

Then maybe we should get rid of the Teachers Union and fire all the staff that are unnecessary but hold on to their jobs through Union sponsorship.

Something tells me you wouldn't be so eager to scrimp if it was your line of work we were talking about...

Electricians and plumbers have to pass certification exams and re-certify yearly.

Most states that require liscencing require renewal exams every 5-10 years AND that a teacher recieve their graduate degree in education before a certain amount of time...

Where does your irrational hatred of educators come, exactly?

You seem very eager to include us all in the category of "useless, overpaid idiots"

If you're so much more qualified to teach children, why don't you go into the field? Maybe then you'll realize what it's like to fear dwindling job security and have to buy school supplies out of your own pocket for children because the school and their parents can't afford them...

My students seem to think I'm a pretty good teacher. I've gotten letters, cards and gifts from students who say that because of me, they like a subject they once hated. I have students cry and hug me at graduations... and I know I'm not the only one.

Yes, I've met a handful of crappy teachers: but for every one of them, there are four or five incredibly overworked, dedicated individuals who are carving something extraordinary out of their limited resources. They touch children's hearts and open their minds-- the important thing isn't that students go out into the world knowing basic multiplication: it's that they go out into the world wanting to learn more about whatever it is that they're passionate about.

Originally Posted by Meji Imaru

Read the first post of the topic

I agree! That's a bunch of bull. I think he's just tryin' to find a reason to hate his job, personally. My mother's a teacher, and granted she has her own issues with the way things are handled in our school district, she'll stick to her job, because it's what she wants! She could really care less about the money--to a certain degree; we all need it--but her main focus is on educating children. I don't think it's good to merit pay based on test scores just because, like the prof. said, "Testing in itself, does not lead to improvement." There are some kids who pass tests by sheer luck, or they cram the night before--at the very last minute--so they can have answers fresh in thier head the next day and forget it all directly after class. If you want to be paid on how many students don't learn anything, that seems a bit fair compared to pay from testing scores. LOL.

I myself do not agree with the No Child Left Behind act and if anything it has caused decline and not progress. My class had a conversation about this recently. What really came to my attention was the very manner in which they measured progress. They do not base it on the progress of a group of students from one grade to the next, they remain in one grade and compare the test scores of the next class. What i mean is say for example IOWA's or CRT progress is not determined by measuring how a group of students did as sophmores then as juniors, instead they collect data from one group of sophmores and compare it to the following year's sophmores. That is not a proper way to measure progress.

Originally Posted by tsurara

I don't teach MATH

I don't care if you don't teach math basic multiplication is a necessary skill in everyday life from shopping to home loans. Can you even figure your tax on a purchase for total costs?

Originally Posted by tsurara

We go to college to learn useful skills relevant to our respective carrers: not general knowledge.

No, you go to tech school to learn skills relevant to your respective careers. You go to college to get a degree that says you not only know your subject but have a well rounded knowledge of the world and are competent in many pertinent subjects such as math that will impact your ability to succeed in a changing work environment. That is why you have to pass advanced Algebra to graduate from any respectable University or College. Waaay past basic multiplication.

Originally Posted by tsurara

When you're learning about history and your book ENDS with the Regan presidency... I would say that's a problem.

mhmmm... one class out of how many that don't change? Every other? It's not that hard to get interim info either. There is tons on information online just for situations like that. (Not that it would have mattered before standardized tests. In all my years of public school I never once had a history class actually get to the back of the book nor knew anyone who had. But yeah, those standards aren't that important are they?)

Originally Posted by tsurara

Something tells me you wouldn't be so eager to scrimp if it was your line of work we were talking about...

You assume wrong. You also show the exact line of thought that offends me. Teachers are public servants and should be held accountable by the public. It's not a "line of work" it is a service just like Firefighters and Policemen. The difference is that I don't see them getting upset because people want them to be competent and show results.

Originally Posted by tsurara

Most states that require liscencing require renewal exams every 5-10 years AND that a teacher recieve their graduate degree in education before a certain amount of time...

Lets see how that compares to yearly exams and losing their license for incompetence. Nope, doesn't measure up.

Originally Posted by tsurara

Where does your irrational hatred of educators come, exactly?

Because when I said, "I have every respect for teachers. I have no respect for people who feel entitled to benefits without results." I was showing an "irrational hatred of educators"? Don't be absurd. As I said before I have every respect for teachers. I have no respect for the Teachers/Education Union after watching them scream anytime they were held accountable for their actions and do their best to force parents to keep their kids in their system unless they could afford private schools. I have friends and relatives who teach and I have done my best not to be sick to my stomach as they tell me how their yearly updates from the Union before the school year was basically nothing more then a "this is why the new standards suck and you are being screwed". There is a complete disassociation between the National organizations and parents. Every time there is a law voted in that would place more responsibilities with the parents the Union fights it as if there very life was threatened. They are completely out of touch in my opinion and have turned into another government pork barrel fighting for their existence.

Originally Posted by tsurara

If you're so much more qualified to teach children, why don't you go into the field? Maybe then you'll realize what it's like to fear dwindling job security and have to buy school supplies out of your own pocket for children because the school and their parents can't afford them...

As a matter of fact I home school my children because of what I have both experienced and witnessed personally. I do spend my own money on supplies out of my own pocket because tax money intended for my child for school doesn't go to any child outside the public school system in this state.

Originally Posted by tsurara

the important thing isn't that students go out into the world knowing basic multiplication: it's that they go out into the world wanting to learn more about whatever it is that they're passionate about.

Oh what a... give me a break. How many people actually get to go into their field of choice? The average person has 5 different careers in their lifetime. If all you have taught them is to want to learn about something they are already passionate about then you have failed them and set them up for a life of failure. The point of an education is exactly what it is called EDUCATION. If they leave school without being educated then you haven't done that. Standards require an evidence of EDUCATION. People don't have to like it they just have to do it.

Perhaps it would be believable that they only wanted what was best for the children if when No Child Left Behind was instituted they said, "it has some problems can we make adjustments based on X"? I have never heard that however. All I hear is, "it sucks", "the system is broken", "a teacher could be fired because their students didn't pass", "we need to get rid of standardized tests".

They want to return to what it was like when I was in high school. When the best Teacher I ever had was so good at teaching his subject and got us so involved that he was giving the hardest tests he ever had and 70% of all his classes were still getting A's... and he was told he has to stop because he was making the other teachers look bad. Under the standards you are objecting to, under pay based on results, he would be the highest paid teacher in the school, and he should be. That is what incentive will do for you.

Here is the real question, do you want to teach or do you want tenure? If you want tenure get the degree and teach at a University. When it comes to primary education I want people who want to teach. When I find it AND a system that allows them to then my children will go learn from them, not before.

O.o

Okay just by reading Arrianna's and tsuara's arguements...I'm scared. But I'm going to try and present my arguement to the table.

Anyways I think No Child Left Behind is a waste of time and funding. For one thing I don't agree with the standardized tests. Sure it's supposed to test what we've learned over the years but then what's the point in taking exams, the SATs, the ACTs. Also here in Texas you are required to pass the TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) for graduation. Which is stupid. If you don't pass it you get a certificate saying you went to school for twelve years which just proves that if that happens then your time in school is a waste of time.

Another thing is paying teachers a higher amount won't do a student any good. Trust me that has happened in my hometown. My third grade teacher was probably paid much more than teachers now. Don't ask me how much cause I don't know. Anyways she was a crappy teacher and I was learning kindergarten math instead of well third grade math. So many may be an issue to some it doesn't fit into the equation.

College DOES however have classes that do fit what you want to do once you get out of college. (As does high school, well my high school at least) Like say I want to be a psychologist (which I do) they offer psychology, sociology, and other social science classes that are required for you to major in that field. If there weren't any corressponding to your job then why the hell do you need majors for? Tech schools are simply put schools where you want to learn about technology. In other words, computer programming, game design, basically anything that deals with computers. Actually pay attention to the ITT tech commercials.

And another thing grades doesn't mean shit. Seriously. There is a huge difference between doing something out in rl and learning it in a book. Those who can do it effectively in the rl. Those who learn and only know it by the book should teach it. In other words an engineer needs to learn how to work with their hands half the time. Not their booksmarts. An engineer who only knows it by the book can't work with their hands and can't repair a simple machine effectively nor efficently as the engineer who can work without leanring it by the book. So who do you choose? Of course you'll choose the book-smart engineer, why because he went to college of course. But you'll make a mistake. That's why those who can only teach should leave it to those who can do the job effectively. In other words you can get all the A's you want but you will still fail life.

I just hope this all made sense. ^___^U

Originally Posted by Descended From Darkness

College DOES however have classes that do fit what you want to do once you get out of college. (As does high school, well my high school at least) Like say I want to be a psychologist (which I do) they offer psychology, sociology, and other social science classes that are required for you to major in that field. If there weren't any corressponding to your job then why the hell do you need majors for? Tech schools are simply put schools where you want to learn about technology. In other words, computer programming, game design, basically anything that deals with computers. Actually pay attention to the ITT tech commercials.

Tech/Trade schools are schools that teach you exactly what you need to work in the field and no more. Colleges/Universities require that you also pass general requirements in Humanities, Language Arts, Fine Arts, History, Math, etc. That is the difference between them. If someone has a Certificate then the have only passed specific Tech/Trade requirements. If they have an ASS, BS, MS, PHD etc then they have also passed other requirements such as Adv Algebra. That was my point.

Originally Posted by Arrianna

You go to college to get a degree that says you not only know your subject but have a well rounded knowledge of the world and are competent in many pertinent subjects such as math that will impact your ability to succeed in a changing work environment.

Originally Posted by Descended From Darkness

In other words an engineer needs to learn how to work with their hands half the time. Not their booksmarts. An engineer who only knows it by the book can't work with their hands and can't repair a simple machine effectively nor efficently as the engineer who can work without leanring it by the book. So who do you choose?

Depends on the job. If you want someone to work with their hands then you look for someone with work experience. If you want a beginning engineer to help with figures and mapping you get someone from school that has passed the tests that says they know how. (My sister was majoring in engineering. )

Originally Posted by Descended From Darkness

I just hope this all made sense. ^___^U

Yes, hope I didn't scare you to much.