Comments for RE: Knocked Out, Technically at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 11 out of 11 comments http://www.theind.com Sat, 18 May 2013 03:09:36 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-18003 Ragin, I don't think you can re-create parent involvement or create a substitute parent. In fact, my advocating that borders on being too touchy-feely liberal to me but I just concluded that if you REALLY want to solve the problem of under-performing schools - you have to create a greater connection between teacher and student. That is why I came up with lower student teacher ratios, two year teaching blocks and more of a year round schooling period. Of course, I don't really think anything will ever be done. Reality is that more and more parents who truly care will move their kids into private schools leaving public schools as nothing but glorified day care. And over time (next 10-20 years), a conservative city like Lafayette will not approve any new taxes for schools and you might even see renewals not getting passed. Of course, the "rich" will be blamed for failing the public schools but the truth will be that the dye was cast decades earlier. All the best, Soop - Soop. Tue, 24 May 2011 07:14:44 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17982 Soop -- I've heard that about parent involvement before, from teachers, and seen it myself, and I agree. I've been told that's why magnet/charter schools are more successful, too. Those schools by definition skim out kids from public schools whose parents care enough to move them into a charter/magnet school, and that is why those schools are more successful. The parents care....period. I've even been told that parent involvement skews results of educational research because lots of things are "proven" successful but they are tested on kids whose parents are involved, so those kids would have succeeded anyway. Makes educational research very hard. I'm personally don't think that anything can re-create parent involvement in schools. But, I think that most places in the US have enough money to throw around that I'm not averse to schools trying. We waste tax dollars on a lot more hopeless causes. But, what I'd like to see is some recognition from government, and school systems, that good kids need to be separated from not so good kids. I've had some friends whose kids have had some pretty bad experiences in public schools because the school system won't control the situation, won't let parents onto the campus, won't separate out kids with serious problems, and won't accept that they can't be reached. - ragin_cajun Mon, 23 May 2011 13:48:34 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17966 To ragin, that answer for bad schools under a "Soop" School District gets a little complicated. First some background - my mom is an educator. My wife is an educator. Both in public schools and both served stints in "good schools" and "bad schools." I was reared in public schools. The one common denominator of "good schools" is parent participation. The one common denominator of "bad schools" is a lack of parent participation. I don't need to see test scores, the tenure papers of the teachers or know how many kids are on free lunches to tell which one is good vs. bad. You look at parent participation and that tells the tale. Because those parents who are active at school are the same ones who read to their kids at night, who help their kids with homework and who generally present a positive learning environment for their kids. So, I think the question becomes, how do you re-create that parent environment in schools that don't have a parent environment. I think the answer is to lower student-teacher ratios (I'm talking down to 5 to 1); have teachers stay with the kids for two years instead of one (teachers teach K and 1st, 2nd and 3rd, 4th and 5th) at least through elementary school; and go to closer to year round schooling (same number of days but just bigger breaks - including about a 4 week summer break). Gotta run -- All the best, Soop - Soop. Mon, 23 May 2011 08:42:14 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17965 All due respect Steve, schools aren't getting better, they are getting worse. Organizations such as yours have had decades and decades to improve the problem and they haven't been able to do so. Our schools are more primed for social engineering and protecting teachers than they are for teaching children. The biggest laugher of your comments was the Federation is interested in "research based reforms with proven track records." That means - "we want the status quo until you can definitively prove something else is better." And proven track record? How does a program get a proven track record if the education interests beat back every single attempt to change the status quo? And let me break down "research based" - that means more eggheads spending government money "studying" various things for years on end. And I never said the teaching institution wasn't interested in teaching kids .... I said it wasn't their primary concern. The fact that you are willing to keep things as is ad infinitum is proof of that fact. If the education of kids was your primary concern, you would recognize the dire situation and form an "educational fire brigade" to put out the flames. But apparently the only things that incenses you to take action -- are comments on a website blog. All the best, Soop - Soop. Mon, 23 May 2011 07:19:28 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17909 Also, looking into this further, I found a short paper discussing the difference between "charter schools" and "magnet schools". http://www.researchonreforms.org/html/commentary/researchpapers/Admission Requirements and Charter Schools.pdf The paper explains the difference between "equal opportunity" and "conditioned opportunity". The crux of the paper is that New Orleans Charter Schools are actually magnet schools because they don't provide equal opportunity, they provide a conditioned opportunity. They have admissions standards, require parents to sign contracts and attend meetings, and require students to fulfill academic and behavioral expectations to attend. That all sounds perfectly reasonable to me, but the author of the paper disagrees. Are we seriously trying to educate kids that won't study, won't try, won't behave in class? Are we seriously trying to educate kids whose parents refuse to help, refuse to be involved, refuse to sign written agreements and live up to them, refuse to attend meetings with the school? Is that what this has all come down to? There's no point at which a school can say that a child and his/her parents are uninterested in education, so they just shouldn't go? I think there should be. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. - ragin_cajun Fri, 20 May 2011 12:30:19 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17906 "The underlying assumption – that teachers, school boards and superintendents are not interested in improving public education – is simply not true." Can you briefly outline what efforts you, your organization, your membership would support to improve the state of public education Louisiana? Also, could you give us a sense of what you and your members see as the condition of our public schools, and what you see as the main problems? If Pastorek or the writer of this article are in error, then as a leader of a group teachers, please educate us. I am very serious. I think many of us in Louisiana are very impatient with the politicization of all this. I invite you to start the reasoned public discussion of this issue here. - ragin_cajun Fri, 20 May 2011 11:22:56 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17898 "Go back to neighborhood schools and put accountability back in the hands of the parents " I like that. A lot. That's how it should be, that's how I thought it was always intended to be. But what happens when one neighborhood has GREAT schools, and some other neighborhood has BAD schools. What then? That would offend someone's sense of "fairness". Would you, in that hypothetical situation, support a law that forbids outside government interference to remedy that situation? Because you and I both know, some busy body would come along and DEMAND that all the schools be equal in OUTCOME, as well as opportunity. - ragin_cajun Fri, 20 May 2011 09:32:29 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17897 The article errs with its obvious support for the assumption that the "my way or the highway" approach to school improvement is a formula for success. The Louisiana Federation of Teachers rejects the idea that in order to improve a community, an institution, a profession, or a school, it must first be conquered. The underlying assumption – that teachers, school boards and superintendents are not interested in improving public education – is simply not true. This Federation is very interested in research-based reforms with proven track records. However, we do have a problem with ideologically driven or market-driven schemes that almost always begin with an attack on educators and public education and often conclude with a scheme to enrich so-called education entrepreneurs while depriving public schools of resources. There is ample evidence to question many of the reforms rushed into practice following the devastating storms of August 2005. And, yes, there are dueling data. However, thus far, an honest discussion and reconciliation of the facts has not occurred. We welcome you to visit Research on Reforms in New Orleans for an examination of this data at this Web site: http://www.researchonreforms.org/. - Steve Monaghan, President, Louisiana Federation of Teachers Fri, 20 May 2011 09:16:00 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17835 This is proof yet again that the ultimate care and concern of the various "education" interests is to protect their jobs and patronage. The actual schooling or teaching of our kids is way down the list (and I am assuming it is on the list at all). I am tired of everyone knowing there is a problem but having no real solutions. The public education sector's solution is more of the same. I for one am about ready to punt on public education altogether. Or at least on a national or statewide level. The only thing that will solve the education problem is for everyone involved to step up and take responsibility. Go back to neighborhood schools and put accountability back in the hands of the parents rather than the BESE board or even a local board for that matter. All the best, Soop - Soop. Thu, 19 May 2011 09:53:52 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17820 A well written commentary. More importantly your commentary is the simple truth - Cajunhiker Wed, 18 May 2011 16:33:02 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/8310-knocked-out-technically#comment-17815 Change is always uncomfortable. But change is what we need to advance the state of public education in Lafayette and Louisiana. The most controversial position that Pastorek advocated was the fact that ALL children can succeed regardless of their family circumstances. He never said that the classroom teacher bore that sole responsibility. Or that charter schools were the only answer. What he did advocate was a realistic community response to the circumstances of children who are disadvantaged due to economics, race or parenting. It's not their fault. But the reality is that we, as a community, need to provide the opportunities to succeed if they're families are unable to do so. That's why early childhood developement is so important. We can either provide quality pre-K assistance or we can build more jails, hire more police and lament the unfairness of it all. - Gary McGoffin Wed, 18 May 2011 13:42:45 +0100