How would you change and improve the education system?

More competition to the public schools that is accessible to everyone

1: abolish the U.S. Department of Education
2: grant the parents of each school-age child a voucher for educational expenses to where any school can be selected

Fully agree with George on both points.The Federal Government has no madate to manage education.

washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/05/AR2008070501400.html?hpid=topnews)


I still think that education decisions are best done at the local level with proper respect for parental consent.
Textbooks, curriculum and guest speaker agendas must be made available to anyone requesting this information.

I would also add that teachers' salaries should be based on performance rather than solely on tenure. Reward superior teachers and create procedures for the remove ineffective educators.[ Yes I know Obama made waves with the teachers union over his support of merit pay].

Take steps to wrest control of the profession from the Teacher's Unions and encourage with incentives the recruitment of teachers from the professional private sector. If they demonstrate competence in instructing students then certain aspects of the "credential process" should be waived and they should be fast-tracked into the system(assuming they pass backround checks).

All students should finish their education having a degree of competence in personal finance with emphasis on personal debt, savings and investments.

A goal should be for graduating students to have enough understanding and appreciation of civics to be able to pass the current version of the citizens test that immigrants wishing to be citizens are required to take. .

Basal skills of reading, writing, mathematics, and objective science should be taught at the earliest age possible.

Lots of good ideas, Mr. Tom; and I would add, restoring a strong measure of discipline in the classrooms. Anyone see the HBO program on Frederick Douglas High School in Baltimore? What a tragedy and most of it results from weak, ineffective discipline.

Y'all have missed the important change - get rid of at least half the administrators and pay teachers what they're worth. All that top-heavy expenditure for people who don't even come in contact with students. And get the colleges and univ to do a better job of training teachers - not just in the subject, but HOW to teach.

And while I don't like the gov't dictating to locals, money is a factor there. Many local school districts need the federal or at least state funds. And making some things a bit more than a suggestion isn't necessarily bad. There was an improvement in our math and science skils after the federal calls to improve those fields in the late 50s & 60s (space race had a lot to do w/ it). But we need to keep education. Accessible to all and free of ideological and political agendas. Increasing knowledge is the aim of education.


_

In addition to agreeing with tom, George and gutting administrations I'd adopt some ideas from Mike Adams' If I Ran the Zoo (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2008/06/16/if_i_ran_the_zoo) column for state colleges and universities. I would eliminate speech codes, diversity policies, women's resource centers and fire any chancellor/administrator that allowed discrimination and/or censorship toward conservative and Christian groups in the use of student fees and school publications. I'd also make it easier to fire bad professors regardless of tenure, especially those that intimidate and harass conservative students and/or refuse to allow for a diversity of ideas in their classrooms.

fully agree with George on both points.The Federal Government has no madate to manage education.

washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines (http://washingtonpost.com)
...

Take steps to wrest control of the profession from the Teacher's Unions and encourage with incentives the recruitment of teachers from the professional private sector. If they demonstrate competence in instructing students then certain aspects of the "credential process" should be waived and they should be fast-tracked into the system(assuming they pass backround checks).
...

The real 'customers' in primary and secondary education are the administrators and teachers, not the students. We all agree there will never be enough money in 'education', but the huge sums going in now are going to buildings, admins, and teachers. A voucher system could straighten out education in the U.S. with dramatic test results in three years. As far as credentials to teach are concerned, Albert Einstein couldn't teach in U.S. schools today because he is not certified. In other words, he hasn't taken two years of education classes to figure out how to maintain discipline in the American classroom jungle.

In other words, he hasn't taken two years of education classes to figure out how to maintain discipline in the American classroom jungle.
The education classes I took had to do with the theory of education; we never got into the practical aspects of it. We begged for courses on how to maintain classroom discipline and were told, "You'll figure that out soon enough." The closest we got to that kind of course was Ed Psych which told us only a little bit about young psyches, but not how to influence them.

I hope colleges do a better job of training teachers now. But I suspect not.

Get rid of no child left behind. What a crock. If they don't pass the grade, they don't pass. They do it again. Advancing them even though they can't read in some way promotes success? What?

Pay teachers more than professional sports players. It's ridiculous that people get paid millions each year to play a game and teachers can barely get by on what they're paid. Though I suppose it does help insure that the people who are teaching are the ones who truly care about the kids/learning.

Get rid of standardized testing. Or enhance it. Right now the 11th grade Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS--standardized test) is on par with about 5th grade I'd say. What a waste of paper and time. Teachers have to teach to the test, not the real world. I would create a better situation there.

Those are my main things. I don't know why this is so subjective. Isn't it obvious, if you can't read you can't graduate? What is so hard about that? It's for your own good. It's time we catch up to other countries who are turning out a much higher percentage of intelligent youth. It's not because Americans aren't smart, it's because the education system is too forgiving/lax. If they know they can get by without really learning anything, well heck, it's the easiest way to get through it. This is so dumb and obvious to me. Makes me wonder if most politicians are just plain stupid.

Get rid of no child left behind. What a crock. If they don't pass the grade, they don't pass. They do it again. Advancing them even though they can't read in some way promotes success? What?
...

You must understand "no child left behind" within the context: failed government schools and more, more money for admins, teachers, buildings. Yet, kids aren't learning and other nations are pulling ahead on standardized tests. "No Child" was bi-partisan: Bush (Compassionate Conservative, 'standards') plus Kennedy (Liberal, 'federal money' for education). Pundits talk about Social Security being the third rail of politics; well, education is riding right behind. At the end of the day, it will not work. We will have trial lawyers suing school boards, winning huge judgements because kids aren't learning in the schools that gov't built, all in the name of, "Education". It doesn't have to be this way. If we take away standards and testing the swamp will just get deeper and wider.

What I don't understand is how the idea that a child should be promoted to the next grade when he/she has not mastered the current grades fundamentals was ever thought to be a good thing. That is the result isn't it? The child doesn't pass, but goes on to the next grade anyway. I'm not saying there shouldn't be standards, but get rid of current standards and aim higher. If the kids in America were really as dumb as the test they have to pass, the country would fail within a generation.

[QUOTE=smokedetector]What I don't understand is how the idea that a child should be promoted to the next grade when he/she has not mastered the current grades fundamentals was ever thought to be a good thing. That is the result isn't it?. QUOTE]
This was the state of affairs beforeNo Child Left Behind, which is an attempt on the federal level to get the schools to teach. Check your TV listings for HBO and see if you can view this movie: YouTube - HBO Documentary Films: Hard Times At Douglass High (HBO) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcTP12PZm8E&feature=related)
They try to bring "No Child" into blame on this, but there is no way it can be held accountable for this tragedy.

They try to bring "No Child" into blame on this, but there is no way it can be held accountable for this tragedy.
The tragedy of NCLB is that teachers are forced to teach "to the test" so their students pass. The kids cram and then forget everything fifteen minutes after the test has been taken. That's why the current crop of US students doesn't know anything about history, English, geography, or science.

The tragedy of NCLB is that teachers are forced to teach "to the test" so their students pass. The kids cram and then forget everything fifteen minutes after the test has been taken. That's why the current crop of US students doesn't know anything about history, English, geography, or science.
NCLB is an attempt, by government, to salvage something from the huge expenditures of public money. The schools weren't working before No Child, but it represents gov't's attempt to be accountable, something liberals and Democrats do not want; they have 'sold out' to the teacher lobby, unfortunately, but that's just the way big-time, money politics works. Do you see what is happening to General Motors today? Do you have an opinion, why? Unions. Education is going down the same path. I read in today's paper that VW is opening a new plant in Tennessee; GM is, according to some, headed for bankruptcy; why?

Here's an interesting article: "The dropout report, released Wednesday by the California Department of Education, estimated that one in four high school students - 24.2 percent - failed to graduate with their classes or move into another educational program to continue their high school education. The estimates were derived from data from the 2006-07 school year." Top Stories - One of every four California students drops out - sacbee.com (http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1087824.html)

Get rid of no child left behind. What a crock. If they don't pass the grade, they don't pass. They do it again. Advancing them even though they can't read in some way promotes success? What?

Center on Education Policy (http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document_ext.showDocumentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=241)

According to this document, from CEP, our students are doing better every year! Apparently someone thinks it's OK to give a report of that nature while it's obvious that many kids leave school without a clue. I've noticed many students who can't do basic math and must use a calculator for the simplest math. The cash registers at McDonald's have pictures of items so the worker will know which keys to push for prices.

I think our whole school system is operated on fear these days, and with fear present, there is little else.

We tried to establish a proper dress code with the idea that when a person feels good about the way they look, they will do better. The parents raised the roof and the code was dropped.

We tried to establish discipline to keep classrooms from falling apart by unruly students, and parents called their lawyers.

We tried to set-up metal detectors for those entering our schools with guns and other weapons, but the ACLU ruled it was a violation of rights.

Every step we've tried to go to protect our students, teachers and promote better learning has been thwarted.

The students feel they're in control of the school - and in many cases that is the truth. How can we expect our teachers to give their best under these conditions?

It eventually comes down to simply doing a day's work for a day's pay. Teachers who love teaching and seeing a student excel must not become too personally involved in these times, or they might be considered discriminatory or of having dubious reasons for doing so.

If we really want our children to learn, give teachers some leeway to control their own classrooms. They deserve respect - and our students need to learn to practice showing respect too.

I like what Tom reported in another thread... We must start earlier to teach our children and make absolutely certain they have learned as they go from grade to grade. If it is not learned well, the next step will only put them behind further. We should use higher testing methods to be certain they know what is needed before passing them to the next level.

Michelle Rhee has been tasked by Washington DC Mayor Adrian Fenty to reform education in the city . He recently dismissed the school board and is managing the schools directly.Rhee implemented a daring reform program as soon as she took office.She shut down 23 poorly performing public schools, replaced over 30 percent of school principals .

She makes some interesting comments about the direction she is taking in an interview with Charlie Rose.

A conversation with Michelle Rhee, Chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools - Charlie Rose (http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2008/07/14/1/a-conversation-with-michelle-rhee-chancellor-of-the-district-of-columbia-public-schools)

She notes that new laws allow her to allow her to hire and fire administrative staff "at will" consistent with their performance.This implies that until the legislation was passed the administration had the same type of tenure protection . But she has no power to reward compensation for good principles .So the good ones often defect to higher paying surrounding districts. She says that her necessary reforms would not happen if subject to interference by school-board politics, particularly since many school board members nationwide are elected with the political support of the teachers union.

She says she is solidly behind NCLB. Test scores have already improved under her leadership. The ratio of elementary school students who achieved proficiency in math rose from 29 percent last year to 40 percent this year, while in reading comprehension the ratio rose from 38 percent to 46 percent over the same period. The ratio of middle and high school students who achieved proficiency in math rose from 27 percent to 36 percent, while in reading comprehension the ratio rose from 30 percent to 39 percent.
washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines (http://washingtonpost.com)

This is tangential to the thread, but I want to say it anyway.
The answer is home school. I know it is not possible for everyone, but there are several good programs that produce superior results. In some places, home schoolers are pooling their children in some convenient location, rotating the duties between the parents and having good success.
All of which may illustrate the point of bringing education back to the local level.

RE home school: 2 prob. Kids learn more than ABCs at school. There's also the socialization. Also, have to be careful on home sch programs. Many are lacking in proper science education.

RE home school: 2 prob. Kids learn more than ABCs at school. There's also the socialization. Also, have to be careful on home sch programs. Many are lacking in proper science education.
Pooling the home school children takes care of the socialization. Anyway, what the kids learn in public school socially is WAY overrated.
Academically, home school students consistently score better than their public school contemporaries in all subjects.

Abolish the Department of Education.

Since the first day this was founded, our level and quality of education has gone consistently downhill.

I believe vouchers would bring positive results for 'American education', which is too beholden to government and union control. Have you read about education vouchers in Sweden and Finland? "The equally socialist Sweden is also letting the free market work in their schools. They've adopted vouchers. Sweden's voucher system allows parents to opt out of the public schools and send their kids to private school regardless of family income." clarkhoward.com: Clarchives clarkhoward - Clark Howard's Show Notes school choice & other experiments (http://clarkhoward.com/shownotes/category/1/105/279/)

Those supposed higher test scores among the home schooled have not been proven.

And for those who want the gov't out of education, you also seem to want vouchers. So just who is going to be providing the money for those? The gov't. Do you really think that the gov will pay for something and not want a hand in administration?

No provate school system will allow the education of all, no matter how good or wide spread a voucher system is supposed to be. Those private schools would have no requirement to accept all students.

And no matter what you think of the education system, an educated public is absolutely vital. That includes all.

WV, you have a lot more confidence in the public education system than I do. My father, born in 1898, finished 6 years of formal schooling. He was better educated than 2yr college grads today, and proved it back in about 1948 when some students at UT Austin brought him some tests. They were curious as to just how much he really knew. They were impressed!
My youngest son got most of his education in Christian schools and finished his hs at home, and when he took the required final exams, scored in the top 5% nationally.

Additional thoughts about school teaching socialization: Which of the social graces does public education teach? How to extort lunch money from weaker students? How belonging to a gang makes you better? Being pressured to conform to your peers by having sex? Learning what it is like to get high on drugs (taught by the resident pusher)? I'm sure there are other social graces that I haven't thought of right now, but are these what you refer to?

1. Get a clear consensus of why we are educating our children. Look this up on the net and you will find virtually no answer. If you look at college guidelines for acceptance you find they are looking for either well rounded candidates or passionate candidates. These sound like laudable goals. But it means that HS graduates don't need to know anything of values just a little bit about a lot of different stuff. Or a blind drive for something. What does this mean to the man in the street. No much.
Look at where our school's curriculum comes from.
A. apprentship programs (slavery, indentured servants, guild programs, etc)
B. Professional schools (Seminaries)
C. Elementery schools (Reading (the bible), writing, Arithmatic) taught to the tune
D. Hard knocks (ouch)
E. University (Liberal arts, what did the rich plantation owners do during the long winter months to entertain themselves)

University won out, and now education in the public school system id designed as edutainment. School ala Alex Trebec. Fun if you have the time to waste, but not very valuable. If you don't believe me ask any student who has learned to read.

It has been said that poor children do poorer in schools than their more affluent bretherern. This is not because money makes you smarter, (all evidence seems to indicate the opposite), it is because what is being taught has less value for someone who needs a ladder out of poverty than someone who only need for a HS degree is an introduction to someone who is looking for a well rounded person.

Being well rounded does not put food on the table, cars in the garage, or vacations in summer. The poor are smart, they are being offered Marie Antoinette's Cake. There is no bread.

2. Change the curriculum to something that is of real value.

3. Make it clear that we are educating the youth of the nation so that they can, without the aid of government, comfortably provide for their own needs and the needs of their families (wives, childere, parents, etc.)
A. teach how the various markets (Stock, commedities, products, money, etc) work. How they can be used to make money, how to invest, how to prepare for retirement, how to manage money, the basics of finance, economics micro and macro. Monitary theory, Economic theories (Capitolism, Communisim, facism (yes it is an economic theory), socialism, Fuedleism, whatever) showing the strenghts and weakness of each. -- It is important to learn bad and dangerous systems properly so their allure doesn't drag us into their malestorm --
B. Use the lessons of economics to build critical thinking, enhance basic mathmetical skills, deal with complex and often misleading reading material, Write plans and proposals to test economic positions and operate in current and historical market postiions.
C. Build off an economic background to see the many enjoyable aspects of ecucation (music, arts, literature, drama, etc).
D. From the developed realization that real wealth is not money or credit but ideas, and tangible property gbuild an understanding that to increase wealth both personal and national real skills, research, and hard work are necessary. Offer material demonstrating a smorgesboard of possibilities, and branch off into semi-individual cirriculums to develop personnal interests, talents, and abilities.
E. Develop more efficient methods of teaching. A 1 - 15 ratio is nice, but if equal results using a 1 to 100 to 1 to 1000 ratio can be achieved, than more time can be spent on imporving methods of teaching, better results cabn be achieved, and over all costs can be reduced.

Schools are not government baby sitting services
Schools are not a place to make you feel good
Schools are not built for the teachers administratore, or staff
Schools are not entertainment palaces
Schools are not an instrument of social engineering

Schools are necessary to create a self sufficient population
Schools must provide meaningful instruction
The primary function of an education system is to provide the students with the instruction, materials, and knowledge to master subject material, and the methods of using the subject material in a meaninful manner

On teacher pay
a great teacher cannot be overpaid
a bad teacher cannot be underpaid

Question
is it of any value to have good teacher with a bad curriculum

Well said, bob. But if we do that then the people will be smart enough to vote the rascals out, so it isn't in the best interests of the powers that be to do this.
Analisis: get school back into the hands of the local governments, some way, some how.

I agree that the local government should oversee its schools. Also, students should be told that a college degree isn't necessary for success, that the trades pay well--and work the beginning of vocational education into a high school curriculum. There's nothing wrong with being a plumber or a carpenter or a can. And we need to prep kids much better with all the basics, so they know their times tables and can do arithmetic, know grammar, be able to write legibly, plus all the other stuff necessary for a solid grounding no matter where life takes them.

Local governments aren't any better than national one, as long as government is allowed to spend our money without limit it will do whatever it can to get even more money. If we truly wan great public education we need to get education out of the hands of bureaucrats.

Our education system is like those broken down shacks you see on back roads and byways. It is dilapidated, neglected and falling apart. If we really wish to see it improved we need to stop arguing about what color to paint it and start drawing a new blueprint for a system that will meet the needs of today, tomorrow, and beyond. Education is not rainbows, and roses, it is a foundation, which if properly laid out and built, will allow us to build mansions for all where flowers grow, and rivers run clean. If on the other hand we continue to muddle down the path of pipe dreams, and foolishness we seem to think is great art we will find ourselves in a cesspool of decaying garbage, and eternal trash

Local governments aren't any better than national one
No, but local governments understand better than state or national ones the milieu in which a student lives and the challenges he's up against.


It is dilapidated, neglected and falling apart. If we really wish to see it improved we need to stop arguing about what color to paint it
Who is "we"? And who is going to create a new system? Should we "throw out the baby with the bathwater" and "reinvent the wheel"?

Wondergirl >> No, but local governments understand better than state or national ones the milieu in which a student lives and the challenges he's up against.

I wish this were true. Cleveland had local control and 70% of students who entered high school didn't graduate even with social promotion. High school students couldn't read write or do basic math. A change of venue, control, or responsibility is not the answer.

You asked if we throw out the baby with the bath water. Right now the baby is drowning so we must get of the bath water to save the baby. Seriously it probably is not necessary to toss out everything we do in education, but the whole process does need to be thoroughly examined. The basic edutainment paradyme must be replaced with a the concept that education must have actual real world values. We have an epidemic of under educated, unprepared people being dumped on society by big education which claims we are barbarians for not seeing the brilliance of their program to turn out "well rounded" people.

Your final question "who is we". "We" is everyone who is fed up with the status quo of no value education, with an America that is losing its place as a leader of world progress, with the fear of seeing our children and grandchildren dependent on government for their every need. "We" is everyone who believes that greatness is inherent in all of us.

The "customer" in most American schools is the teaching profession, not the student, and certainly not the parents. Their should be no collective bargaining in school districts, and parents should be given a voucher for each child. The principals hire, fire, and direct the curriculum. There would be dramatic turn around in two years, and dramatic results in five, in my opinion.