5 ms·

yes how dare they take vacation as already negotiated in their contract. Darn those teacher hanging at their mansions Also anyone who works at google should no

by bruceb 5y ago

yes how dare they take vacation as already negotiated in their contract. Darn those teacher hanging at their mansions Also anyone who works at google should not be allowed to take vacation if they worked from home. Sure that would go over well. The vaccine wasn’t really available till a few months into 2021, and I can understand the hesitation on some to be the first to take a new vaccine. Yes private schools might run better. Shockingly richer and generally two parent families are going to have children that been primed to respect learning and have less trauma so much easier to deal with. Public schools teachers don’t have this luxury. There certainly could be improvements to public school, some of the curriculum is dumb, but again they have to serve all customers, private schools don’t. I don’t begrudge public school teachers their vacation. I also realize this past year+ has been extremely stressful on parents, especially those who can’t work from home

dorchadas 5y ago
> Yes private schools might run better. Shockingly richer and generally two parent families are going to have children that been primed to respect learning and have less trauma so much easier to deal with. Public schools teachers don’t have this luxury. Exactly. OP acts as if it's such a great surprise they're run better. Obviously they would be, because they can pick and choose who they take and usually only get those kids who's families are well off enough to afford it; those kids already all have huge advantages when it comes to learning. It's exactly why the voucher system would do no good either -- it'd just make the public school worse as the private schools take those kids who are already borderline on affording it.
- brightball 5y ago
  They only get kids whose families are well off enough to afford it, specifically because only people with a lot of money have a choice. You can either afford to: 1. Pay out of pocket for private school 2. Afford to have 1 parent be responsible for participation in some type of home school education (group or otherwise) 3. Relocate your house to somewhere zoned for a “good school” If you can’t afford any of those things, you don’t have a choice. That’s why people want vouchers.
  - dorchadas 5y ago
    The thing is, it only expands the choice to those who are borderline on that group already. It doesn't magically make the choice be available to everyone. For instance, say you're a single parent household and you have to rely on buses. You don't really have 'choice' even within a voucher system. All it does it allow those who can transport their kids to take them elsewhere, making the school that's left behind worse again. So basically it goes from those 'with a lot of money hav[ing] a choice' to 'those with some money having a choice'. It doesn't fix the underlying problems at all, and would actually make them worse for those who are left behind.
    - JPKab 5y ago
      Let me guess: You don't have kids in school, do you? It amazes me how many people with absolutely no skin in the game comment on this stuff.
      - dorchadas 5y ago
        I was literally a teacher in a poor school district. I am looking at it from a different perspective, but that doesn't mean my opinion is inherently not valuable. Yes, it might out work great for those kids who can take advantage. But all those who can't are left behind. And actually be left even more behind, especially as all the extra money that would be going to their school flows out. But, hey, they're not your kids right?
        JPKab 5y ago
        You mistake my disagreement with HOW to take care of those kids with whether or not I care about them, or want to help them. There are other solutions. I was one of those kids. My mother was a drug addict, I spent a large portion of my childhood in a trailer park. There was nothing a teacher could do without me having a structured home life. She would frequently interrupt me when I tried to do my homework, and then yell at me 2 hours later for not having it done. She undermined my teachers at every turn, and when they called to complain about my behavior, she took my side instead of theirs. Once I was provided this structured home life (courtesy of the courts finally giving my father custody of me and my siblings and getting us away from our psycho mother) suddenly I was able to focus on school. If I disrespected a teacher, one phone call to my dad, and I was faced with a terrifying man who made my life hell. This was a powerful incentive to behave for the teachers, and do my homework as well. Bad behavior at school resulted in consequences for me at home. The current public school system isn't capable of fixing this problem. You are just throwing good money after bad, and dragging the kids who would do well in a better school down with the kids whose homes make it impossible for school to do any good. Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children's Zone is an example of a model that works. He keeps the kids at school for very long hours, and minimizes the time they are at home. Public schools were not designed or intended to replace the role of functioning families. Trying to force them into that role is a bad idea, and very ineffective and wasteful. Society has changed, an increasingly large percentage of kids across all ethnic groups (except for Asian Americans) are living in single parent homes. You were a teacher, so I think you are aware of. the fact that they are going back to homes where they are entertained by screens all night. The parents frequently throw their hands in the air, and ask "how can I keep him off video games?" seemingly unaware of the fact that they can take the controllers/phone/laptop whatever away and god forbid take the TV out of the kid's room. The point is that teachers can't fix this. Teacher's unions and public school districts are incentivized to pretend they are capable of addressing the problem, provided they get more money. That's what institutions and organizations do, after all. They always want to expand their scope, get more personnel, do more, and get paid for it. It's dumb in this case.
- JPKab 5y ago
  You are assuming that I am comparing the private school to a poor public school district. I'm not. I live in a wealthy public school district. There are zero impoverished kids in the public schools here, which I actually think really sucks. The point being, there is no excuse. The stats on this school district are public, and it's very wealthy.

by bruceb 5y ago

dorchadas 5y ago

> Yes private schools might run better. Shockingly richer and generally two parent families are going to have children that been primed to respect learning and have less trauma so much easier to deal with. Public schools teachers don’t have this luxury. Exactly. OP acts as if it's such a great surprise they're run better. Obviously they would be, because they can pick and choose who they take and usually only get those kids who's families are well off enough to afford it; those kids already all have huge advantages when it comes to learning. It's exactly why the voucher system would do no good either -- it'd just make the public school worse as the private schools take those kids who are already borderline on affording it.

brightball 5y ago
They only get kids whose families are well off enough to afford it, specifically because only people with a lot of money have a choice. You can either afford to: 1. Pay out of pocket for private school 2. Afford to have 1 parent be responsible for participation in some type of home school education (group or otherwise) 3. Relocate your house to somewhere zoned for a “good school” If you can’t afford any of those things, you don’t have a choice. That’s why people want vouchers.
- dorchadas 5y ago
  The thing is, it only expands the choice to those who are borderline on that group already. It doesn't magically make the choice be available to everyone. For instance, say you're a single parent household and you have to rely on buses. You don't really have 'choice' even within a voucher system. All it does it allow those who can transport their kids to take them elsewhere, making the school that's left behind worse again. So basically it goes from those 'with a lot of money hav[ing] a choice' to 'those with some money having a choice'. It doesn't fix the underlying problems at all, and would actually make them worse for those who are left behind.
  - JPKab 5y ago
    Let me guess: You don't have kids in school, do you? It amazes me how many people with absolutely no skin in the game comment on this stuff.
    - dorchadas 5y ago
      I was literally a teacher in a poor school district. I am looking at it from a different perspective, but that doesn't mean my opinion is inherently not valuable. Yes, it might out work great for those kids who can take advantage. But all those who can't are left behind. And actually be left even more behind, especially as all the extra money that would be going to their school flows out. But, hey, they're not your kids right?
      - JPKab 5y ago
        You mistake my disagreement with HOW to take care of those kids with whether or not I care about them, or want to help them. There are other solutions. I was one of those kids. My mother was a drug addict, I spent a large portion of my childhood in a trailer park. There was nothing a teacher could do without me having a structured home life. She would frequently interrupt me when I tried to do my homework, and then yell at me 2 hours later for not having it done. She undermined my teachers at every turn, and when they called to complain about my behavior, she took my side instead of theirs. Once I was provided this structured home life (courtesy of the courts finally giving my father custody of me and my siblings and getting us away from our psycho mother) suddenly I was able to focus on school. If I disrespected a teacher, one phone call to my dad, and I was faced with a terrifying man who made my life hell. This was a powerful incentive to behave for the teachers, and do my homework as well. Bad behavior at school resulted in consequences for me at home. The current public school system isn't capable of fixing this problem. You are just throwing good money after bad, and dragging the kids who would do well in a better school down with the kids whose homes make it impossible for school to do any good. Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children's Zone is an example of a model that works. He keeps the kids at school for very long hours, and minimizes the time they are at home. Public schools were not designed or intended to replace the role of functioning families. Trying to force them into that role is a bad idea, and very ineffective and wasteful. Society has changed, an increasingly large percentage of kids across all ethnic groups (except for Asian Americans) are living in single parent homes. You were a teacher, so I think you are aware of. the fact that they are going back to homes where they are entertained by screens all night. The parents frequently throw their hands in the air, and ask "how can I keep him off video games?" seemingly unaware of the fact that they can take the controllers/phone/laptop whatever away and god forbid take the TV out of the kid's room. The point is that teachers can't fix this. Teacher's unions and public school districts are incentivized to pretend they are capable of addressing the problem, provided they get more money. That's what institutions and organizations do, after all. They always want to expand their scope, get more personnel, do more, and get paid for it. It's dumb in this case.
JPKab 5y ago
You are assuming that I am comparing the private school to a poor public school district. I'm not. I live in a wealthy public school district. There are zero impoverished kids in the public schools here, which I actually think really sucks. The point being, there is no excuse. The stats on this school district are public, and it's very wealthy.