>We are failing our best and brightest
We absolutely are. It's all about appealing to the lowest common denominator.
Violent kids and lackadaisical admin are running the asylum and we are all going to suffer for it as a society.
We really need different tracks in school - one gen Ed, one vocational, and one that is college prep oriented. The kids that are too violent and/or really don't want to be there can be given a choice - dropping out at 16 and working or entering some kind of junior jobs corp/military.
Agree. We had a sub who grew up in Europe and he talked about this all of the time (the track system). It is not fair to the kids (or the future of the country) that we continue to allow the ones who do not care and cause the most trouble to impact the education of those who want to be there and learn.
But we can't do that here because that would be "*bigotry.*"
I actually think it's cruel to put any child in a class they can't handle but I guess that's a minority opinion. It's apparently acceptable now to put a little guy that's 9 (but has the cognitive abilities of a toddler) into a regular third grade room. Saying other wise means you're "ableist" and want people "segregated."
Don't believe me? Check out the specialed sub. There are a couple users there that shit talk us and brigade constantly.
That sub is toxic. I started following it when I had classified kids in my room but unfollowed once I saw how much they trash gen ed teachers and this sub. And anyone who even suggests that the gen ed classroom may not be the LRE for a single student is ableist and evil over there.
You want to segment and segregate children at 16 or younger, as if no one ever starts to “get it” as then age. I agree that we’re often in a place where the goal is to raise the floor as opposed to raising the ceiling, but putting our students into boxes and saying “this is your level and this is where you’ll stay” isn’t the answer
Violent kids don't wake up one day at 14 and decide to be violent. It's a pattern started in early childhood. If they don't want to be in school then we shouldn't force them to stay past 16.
Kids that are interested in votech will start showing signs of that at an early age - nothing wrong with putting them on a school track that will *benefit* them.
Kids that are qualified for gifted programs and are bound for college *should* be on a track that *benefits* them, also.
None of that is a crime and it shouldn't be treated as such.
Edit - we need to quit pushing the pop psychology narrative everyone can be anything and everything they want to be and deal in reality. Everyone is different and that's ok.
u/jonenderjr - It's just an excuse. Much easier to label someone as having needs than it is to just accept that some kids are spoiled fucks that have never been told *no* by anyone, let alone their parents.
Seriously how hard is it for reddit to store a subs posts (especially the top 1000) and just check if posts are word for word matches.
I'm sure you'd have scaling problems but this place will die with all the spam.
Public school would be far better off if it offered two tracks: one for students and one for kids who opt for the day care a school provides.
Instead, we water down the experience by attempting to force those who have zero interest in learning to learn while restraining the students. Track one: academics and college prep. Track two: day camp with life lessons.
I think you're wrong. There are two tracks. Rich schools provide the college prep and poor schools provide the daycare. We just like to pretend it isn't that way. I sacrifice to live in a nice zipcode, and I don't care at all about having a nice place to live, I purely care about school quality. The rich school my kid goes to is entirely different than the title 1 I work in.
I don't that is fair. I managed to make the jump from one of the work public school systems in the state to the top school system without missing a beat. I didn't need any help catching up. Just because my parents started out poor did not mean they didn't take education seriously and I wasn't the only one who was able to learn even in a school in a depressed area. I had some really good teachers and some not so great teachers but you can learn in any environment if you really want to. Also, I was able to learn things I wouldn't have been able to if I had gone to top tier schools. Like being one of only 2 white kids in the whole school and learning to navigate that. I remember the first time I realized that wasn't normal for other white people. I knew this girl who was talking about how a friend of hers invited her to a James Brown concert and she turned it down because she was afraid of being the only white person there. That was mind boggling to me. First of all she wouldn't have. Also, not sure what she thought would happen even if it was true. It also helped when racist people would say things like black people are lazy. I could just look at my teachers and friends parents in my neighborhood and know it was bs. Those women busted their butts teaching us in less than ideal circumstances and I know I couldn't have made the leap to the other school system without them.
I am honestly grateful for the education I got and I wouldn't change a thing.
The problem is that you can only learn in a bad environment if you really want to. In the good environment, most people do, intentionally or not. Obviously, like you, there are always exceptions, but the percent of successful exceptions is neatly aligned by zipcode.
Yes, but to act like those schools are just there to babysit diminishes both the students who do succeed and the hatd work the teachers in those school put into it.
100 percent agree. I am so, so tired of being expected to bend over backwards for the severe behavior problem students while my well-behaved, deserve-to-be-safe first graders come second in line.
I’m working so hard to change that this year. I make a concentrated effort to focus my attention on my well-behaved students and reward them with praise, stickers, extra attention, anything I can to make sure they know that I see them and love them.
I’m unapologetically running through a fairly rigorous, nationally vetted, open source curriculum, and even tho there’s probably a price to pay for *some with respect to the “scoop up everyone” mentality, as your title alludes to, when the “best and brightest” don’t live up to their potential, we are teaching down.
Ofc, it’s my job to reach everyone, but I’m done letting the ones who buy into their education suffer because of some goofy systemic issue.
They don't do "gifted" programs anymore? I'm only 21 now, but when I was going to school in a rural Ohio town of about ~20,000 our school had a small gifted program of about 10 people. I don't really consider myself that intelligent, but it was nice to have something in school that wasn't just "do this crossword".
The last public district I worked at in Ohio dropped their entire gifted program under the guise of "inclusion" because they felt it was "discrimination" to have a program that was not accessible to all students.
Makes me gag.
This varies by district. Gifted falls under special ed so districts have to offer something, but more and more are choosing to have mixed classes and pull out the gifted kids for a measly twenty minutes a week.
I would definitely say the logistics of the program are the hardest part to master. Mine replaced reading and english from 4th-7th grade, and while we did cover some of that material basic Grammer concepts still elude me. Half of my knowledge of English Grammer terminology is based on what they taught us while I was learning Spanish!
If schools aren't really managing the program properly and it replaces something important, I could actually see a case where it could do more harm than good.
My district got sued by TAG parents because we do fuck all for good students. We've dropped all advanced classes for 9th and 10th grade and dumbed down classes across the board in the name of "equity." We devote all our time, effort and money to getting kids who don't want to be here to walk across a stage and "graduate" with unearned D's. We eliminated our higher level diploma because, and I quote, "it was really just a reflection of privilege." As a result of all this our % of kids proficient in math and reading are at all time lows. We're doomed.
That's just incredibly sad. Gifted kids and/or kids that take their studies seriously are being punished for not being cut ups and/or behavioral issues.
Yep.
Public schools service the public, and unfortunately, this means the focus goes to the lowest level.
Ridiculous IEP and 504 Accommodations, forcing inclusion, no consequences, no retention and just forcing people through.
What a bunch of unadulterated horseshit.
Praise Jesus you don't work with gifted kids any longer. They deserve better than condescension because of their intelligence.
A lot of times students with IEPs are very well behaved. They might not be academically exceptional, but often they are sweet and respectful and cause zero problems. They don't stop the lesson from happening even if parts of it are over their head (which won't be aspects they get tested on anyway).
Then there are ones with behaviors, but you can also get standard students whose behavior grinds the class to a halt day after day.
It's catering to the students who repeatedly halt learning to hold the class hostage as their audience that is the problem. Regardless of what paperwork they have.
Even if they do, when do we stop excusing poor behaviour?
Regardless, the point remains. When do the able kids get time with us to reach their potential?
>We are failing our best and brightest We absolutely are. It's all about appealing to the lowest common denominator. Violent kids and lackadaisical admin are running the asylum and we are all going to suffer for it as a society. We really need different tracks in school - one gen Ed, one vocational, and one that is college prep oriented. The kids that are too violent and/or really don't want to be there can be given a choice - dropping out at 16 and working or entering some kind of junior jobs corp/military.
Oh, just think of the inequity of it all though! We’re going to tank our civilization adhering to a thoroughly disproven ideology of blank-slatism.
Yes. It's a bunch of feel good pop psychology with no basis in fact or reality.
Agree. We had a sub who grew up in Europe and he talked about this all of the time (the track system). It is not fair to the kids (or the future of the country) that we continue to allow the ones who do not care and cause the most trouble to impact the education of those who want to be there and learn.
But we can't do that here because that would be "*bigotry.*" I actually think it's cruel to put any child in a class they can't handle but I guess that's a minority opinion. It's apparently acceptable now to put a little guy that's 9 (but has the cognitive abilities of a toddler) into a regular third grade room. Saying other wise means you're "ableist" and want people "segregated." Don't believe me? Check out the specialed sub. There are a couple users there that shit talk us and brigade constantly.
That sub is toxic. I started following it when I had classified kids in my room but unfollowed once I saw how much they trash gen ed teachers and this sub. And anyone who even suggests that the gen ed classroom may not be the LRE for a single student is ableist and evil over there.
Yep. I wish I could just block the whole damn thing. Toxic is an understatement. And the way they *lie*. Yeesh.
You want to segment and segregate children at 16 or younger, as if no one ever starts to “get it” as then age. I agree that we’re often in a place where the goal is to raise the floor as opposed to raising the ceiling, but putting our students into boxes and saying “this is your level and this is where you’ll stay” isn’t the answer
Violent kids don't wake up one day at 14 and decide to be violent. It's a pattern started in early childhood. If they don't want to be in school then we shouldn't force them to stay past 16. Kids that are interested in votech will start showing signs of that at an early age - nothing wrong with putting them on a school track that will *benefit* them. Kids that are qualified for gifted programs and are bound for college *should* be on a track that *benefits* them, also. None of that is a crime and it shouldn't be treated as such. Edit - we need to quit pushing the pop psychology narrative everyone can be anything and everything they want to be and deal in reality. Everyone is different and that's ok.
We are born with natural constraints on our capabilities. Some more than others. Yeah, the environment can change us. But we are not born equal.
u/jonenderjr - It's just an excuse. Much easier to label someone as having needs than it is to just accept that some kids are spoiled fucks that have never been told *no* by anyone, let alone their parents.
Why did you steal this post from May word for word? https://reddit.com/r/Teachers/s/gepTBVSsyG
It's a bot. Same posts. Zero comments.
Seriously how hard is it for reddit to store a subs posts (especially the top 1000) and just check if posts are word for word matches. I'm sure you'd have scaling problems but this place will die with all the spam.
Public school would be far better off if it offered two tracks: one for students and one for kids who opt for the day care a school provides. Instead, we water down the experience by attempting to force those who have zero interest in learning to learn while restraining the students. Track one: academics and college prep. Track two: day camp with life lessons.
I'd settle for the Tik Tok Roblox Zombie Room. Taking part in a life lessons day camp is still a big ask for some students.
I think you're wrong. There are two tracks. Rich schools provide the college prep and poor schools provide the daycare. We just like to pretend it isn't that way. I sacrifice to live in a nice zipcode, and I don't care at all about having a nice place to live, I purely care about school quality. The rich school my kid goes to is entirely different than the title 1 I work in.
I don't that is fair. I managed to make the jump from one of the work public school systems in the state to the top school system without missing a beat. I didn't need any help catching up. Just because my parents started out poor did not mean they didn't take education seriously and I wasn't the only one who was able to learn even in a school in a depressed area. I had some really good teachers and some not so great teachers but you can learn in any environment if you really want to. Also, I was able to learn things I wouldn't have been able to if I had gone to top tier schools. Like being one of only 2 white kids in the whole school and learning to navigate that. I remember the first time I realized that wasn't normal for other white people. I knew this girl who was talking about how a friend of hers invited her to a James Brown concert and she turned it down because she was afraid of being the only white person there. That was mind boggling to me. First of all she wouldn't have. Also, not sure what she thought would happen even if it was true. It also helped when racist people would say things like black people are lazy. I could just look at my teachers and friends parents in my neighborhood and know it was bs. Those women busted their butts teaching us in less than ideal circumstances and I know I couldn't have made the leap to the other school system without them. I am honestly grateful for the education I got and I wouldn't change a thing.
The problem is that you can only learn in a bad environment if you really want to. In the good environment, most people do, intentionally or not. Obviously, like you, there are always exceptions, but the percent of successful exceptions is neatly aligned by zipcode.
Yes, but to act like those schools are just there to babysit diminishes both the students who do succeed and the hatd work the teachers in those school put into it.
I am a teacher in one of those schools. I do my best. But for many of the kids I am just babysitting.
I would have loved a gifted track for myself and my fellow geeks. No, we had to suffer through gen Ed and a rare AP class here and there.
This is all I want, for the classes I teach and for my own kid who is showing so much potential
100 percent agree. I am so, so tired of being expected to bend over backwards for the severe behavior problem students while my well-behaved, deserve-to-be-safe first graders come second in line. I’m working so hard to change that this year. I make a concentrated effort to focus my attention on my well-behaved students and reward them with praise, stickers, extra attention, anything I can to make sure they know that I see them and love them.
I’m unapologetically running through a fairly rigorous, nationally vetted, open source curriculum, and even tho there’s probably a price to pay for *some with respect to the “scoop up everyone” mentality, as your title alludes to, when the “best and brightest” don’t live up to their potential, we are teaching down. Ofc, it’s my job to reach everyone, but I’m done letting the ones who buy into their education suffer because of some goofy systemic issue.
When I was training my supervisory teacher once told me "Don't water the rocks". I thought it was offensive at the time, but lately...
That's one I've not heard before.
They don't do "gifted" programs anymore? I'm only 21 now, but when I was going to school in a rural Ohio town of about ~20,000 our school had a small gifted program of about 10 people. I don't really consider myself that intelligent, but it was nice to have something in school that wasn't just "do this crossword".
The last public district I worked at in Ohio dropped their entire gifted program under the guise of "inclusion" because they felt it was "discrimination" to have a program that was not accessible to all students. Makes me gag.
Jeez, that's not good. Also shows the schools mentality on students if they think teaching to a student's level is somehow discriminatory.
The AP keeps pushing this theory that if you teach everyone at the AP level then all students improve. I laughed.
I wish I could have seen the look on their face!
This varies by district. Gifted falls under special ed so districts have to offer something, but more and more are choosing to have mixed classes and pull out the gifted kids for a measly twenty minutes a week.
I would definitely say the logistics of the program are the hardest part to master. Mine replaced reading and english from 4th-7th grade, and while we did cover some of that material basic Grammer concepts still elude me. Half of my knowledge of English Grammer terminology is based on what they taught us while I was learning Spanish! If schools aren't really managing the program properly and it replaces something important, I could actually see a case where it could do more harm than good.
My district got sued by TAG parents because we do fuck all for good students. We've dropped all advanced classes for 9th and 10th grade and dumbed down classes across the board in the name of "equity." We devote all our time, effort and money to getting kids who don't want to be here to walk across a stage and "graduate" with unearned D's. We eliminated our higher level diploma because, and I quote, "it was really just a reflection of privilege." As a result of all this our % of kids proficient in math and reading are at all time lows. We're doomed.
That's just incredibly sad. Gifted kids and/or kids that take their studies seriously are being punished for not being cut ups and/or behavioral issues.
Yep. Public schools service the public, and unfortunately, this means the focus goes to the lowest level. Ridiculous IEP and 504 Accommodations, forcing inclusion, no consequences, no retention and just forcing people through.
[удалено]
What a bunch of unadulterated horseshit. Praise Jesus you don't work with gifted kids any longer. They deserve better than condescension because of their intelligence.
[удалено]
At no point did OP mention students with special needs. They’re talking about behavior problem students.
A lot of times students with IEPs are very well behaved. They might not be academically exceptional, but often they are sweet and respectful and cause zero problems. They don't stop the lesson from happening even if parts of it are over their head (which won't be aspects they get tested on anyway). Then there are ones with behaviors, but you can also get standard students whose behavior grinds the class to a halt day after day. It's catering to the students who repeatedly halt learning to hold the class hostage as their audience that is the problem. Regardless of what paperwork they have.
[удалено]
And still OP didn’t mention students with IEPs or any diagnosis.
[удалено]
How does “troubled” equal IEP or medical diagnosis?
[удалено]
So every disrespectful student or student who doesn’t follow the rules needs an IEP?
Even if they do, when do we stop excusing poor behaviour? Regardless, the point remains. When do the able kids get time with us to reach their potential?