Parents Sue Public School Because their Children Didn't Learn!

[doubledeluxe]

One of the huge problems is that schools are not allowed to put the undisciplined, underperforming, or unwilling students in a separate class.

That's where we get this Common Core bullshit of dumbing everything down.

Make the bottom look smarter by making the top dumber.

You need a separate school. People fighting or failing need to be kept away from those that want to learn.

 

[Darwin333]

When students are failed by their school, who is legally responsible?



Some questions.
If you send your children to public school and they don't learn, is it the schools fault?

Does the government guarantee that your children will learn? Or does the government just guarantee that your children will be 'educated'?

Agree or disagree with the Court's ruling?

What do you think?

Uno

The government, under threat of arrest and jailing, requires minors to attend school for the sole purpose of being educated. The government provides said schools and requires parents to send their kids to specific schools (usually) based on location of the families residence.

My opinion is, if the government forces you to participate in something and if you don't they throw your ass in jail, the government is responsible to provide an adequate service. Remove the forced participation part and I personally wouldn't believe the government to be responsible (at least monetarily).

 

[Darwin333]

I also agree with this a LOT. However there are a bunch of just flat out shitty schools out there.

 

[polarmystery]

knowledge retention is not a right...

blame the parents.

I also agree with this a LOT. However there are a bunch of just flat out shitty schools out there.

edit: and this...

 

[silicon]

knowledge retention is not a right...

blame the parents.



edit: and this...

absolutely!

 

[IGBT]

the curriculum probably wasn't worth remembering. endless liberal grievance mongering and alarmist propaganda about the weather.

 

[MovingTarget]

Heh...you've got a 'starve the beast' mentality going on in many instances (not necessarily this one). Much of what goes on in this country in terms of government appropriations and collections is by design....designed to cause failure for specific goals.

I agree. Here in Alabama, "Pro-ration!" is always looming over public school budgets. As much as we say we value education, we certainly don't seem to put our money where our mouths are. But threaten to cancel the football program at any given high school and that funding will appear post-haste. The arts, building maintenance, vocational programs, proper staffing for reasonable classroom size, textbooks that don't fall apart.....good luck with those. Priorities in education have been out of whack for a very long time.

 

[Double Trouble]

Looks like a funding problem then. If people want services, time to raise the taxes. Otherwise, no use whining about getting what you pay for.

It will be interesting to see the experiment of cutting educating funding severely in several states over the next decades. North Carolina and Kansas come to mind. I suspect we'll see the same results as above and then there will be a big push to privatize the schools with vouchers. Of course, nothing can go wrong there. We have adapted an idea of cut, cut, cut, cut, cut for decades and this is the result. Throw in declining wages, resulting in even lower taxes and you'll get this in not just classrooms, but all forms of service.

Also, if you don't believe parents aren't doing enough today to help their kids, I don't know what to say to you. Looking at FAR better funded schools in my area, I see exactly what my cartoon shows, as does my wife who works in the school system. As far as many parents are concerned, it's a baby sitting service, nothing more.

I don't think the facts support your theory. Specifically, "we have adapted an idea of cut, cut, cut, cut, cut for decades and this is the result" is simply not true. Spending on education at all levels has not been cut, it has increased, we still spend more than most other developed countries, and get significantly inferior results.

Looks to me like there are three issues:

1-there are vast differences in the funding levels of different schools and school systems. Schools in affluent areas have more than enough funding, while schools in poor areas don't have enough funding.
2-money spent on education doesn't get spent effectively, much of it is wasted on administrative overhead or management and never makes it to where it can positively impact the education.
3-the most critical factor in the success of students is the parents. No amount of funding or education options can overcome shitty parenting.

Not having even basics such as books and decent facilities is unacceptable IMO. If property taxes are not sufficient to adequately fund even basic schooling, the state needs to step in and fund the school. I'm not a big fan of using property taxes to fund education, it pretty much guarantees that students in affluent areas will get a much better education than students in relatively poor areas.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Is our children learning? I guess not.

No, its "Are our children learning?"

 

[Exterous]

The government, under threat of arrest and jailing, requires minors to attend school for the sole purpose of being educated. The government provides said schools and requires parents to send their kids to specific schools (usually) based on location of the families residence.

Issues of (IMO) criminal negligence aside in this case the idea of required education in many Metro Detroit area schools is laughable. Many truant officers are so overworked there is a severe backlog and most chronically absent students and their parents go unpunished.

I don't think the facts support your theory. Specifically, "we have adapted an idea of cut, cut, cut, cut, cut for decades and this is the result" is simply not true. Spending on education at all levels has not been cut, it has increased, we still spend more than most other developed countries, and get significantly inferior results.

Funding has been cut in some areas while increased in others. Its a bit surreal as to how school budget money can be spent. Much is required to be used only for certain projects and can't be used anywhere else even if the need exists. One such example stands out in my mind: My wife was teaching an 'overage' (More students than typically held in a class) and didn't have enough desks to fit them all. She had to wait 3 weeks (with kids standing or sitting on the floor during class) for the school to go through the process of ordering more desks. In the meantime a class down the hall was able to get an iPad for every kid in the class in 2 days. It was easier and faster to order iPads for students than it was for her to get places for them to actually sit during class....

From what I have seen in the Michigan area budget cuts are being made to educational fundamentals like teacher:student ratios, electives etc while more is being spent searching for the silver bullet (often in expensive technological form) that will fix education.

Interestingly enough she now works at a private school operating on 1/3 of the public school budget. Little in the way of high tech learning tools compared to the public school but class grades are significantly higher. The two biggest differences? Higher teacher:student ratio and involved parents

Not having even basics such as books and decent facilities is unacceptable IMO. If property taxes are not sufficient to adequately fund even basic schooling, the state needs to step in and fund the school.

The school was getting ~$17,000 per student which is more than enough to educate them. The money and school was mismanaged. (HS text books being delivered to the elementary and never moved let a lone used. The HS had no idea they even existed. Staff training trips to Orlando. AV equipment used at staff homes and not returned to the school etc etc)

 

[Engineer]

No, its "Are our children learning?"

:hmm:

 

[silicon]

knowledge retention is not a right...

blame the parents.



edit: and this...

don't forget to blame charles darwin.

 

[WelshBloke]

...

Sounds very different to how it works over here.

The head teacher and board of governors are pretty much allowed free reign with control of the school budget and policies.

There's a national curriculum that they have to meet and the education regulators decend on the school every now and then to audit the children's progress. As long as the school meets regs they can do as they want I think.

 

[OverVolt]

The next time McDonalds screw up my order we might as well make it class action cause they didn't teach anybody anything. :awe:

 

[unokitty]

... Interestingly enough she now works at a private school operating on 1/3 of the public school budget. Little in the way of high tech learning tools compared to the public school but class grades are significantly higher. The two biggest differences? Higher teacher:student ratio and involved parents...

Public school teachers are twice as likely as other parents to send their children to private school...

Reasons teachers gave for sending their children to private schools included greater discipline at private and religious schools, higher academic achievement and a better atmosphere overall...

In Philadelphia, 44 percent of teachers send their children to private schools; the percentage is similar in several other cities -- Cincinnati, 41 percent, Chicago, 39 percent and Rochester, 38 percent...

Your wife isn't the only educator that has noticed the difference between public and private schools.

Nor is she the only one to observe that their funding isn't what makes the difference...

Uno

 

[Jimzz]

If the school passed the children yet they did not meet the basic skills then yes they should be at fault. But if they failed them or kicked them out, for correct reasons, then no.

To many schools offer "extra credit" to get all the kids to pass so they get their funding and make their marks for passing so many students.

 

[Texashiker]

Some questions.
If you send your children to public school and they don't learn, is it the schools fault?

Yes, the school and the teachers should be held responsible. Schools ignore students who learn besides the lecture style of teaching.

And, forcing someone to do something against their will without financial compensation is slavery. Students are robbed of their freedom with no due process and sent to a government institution against their will.

 

[Spungo]

Just a data point showing US primary school funding vs funding in other countries.

American Exceptionalism - our government is consistently worse than every other government in the developed world. Our private organizations seem worse too.

Other countries focus their efforts on education. We focus our efforts on everything but education. Schools in other countries don't have metal detectors. Other countries don't try to make schools look more like prison (seriously). Other countries don't fire teachers so they can hire more administrators. Other countries don't have weird incentives where schools get increased funding if they lower their standards and pump out lower quality graduates.

Our system is so completely broken that it leads to conspiracy theories about dumbing down the population, not teaching critical thinking because thinking makes people harder to control, not teaching math because it makes credit cards easier to push, not teaching history because it makes people easier to manipulate.

The more likely cause of failure is cultural, and it's fairly recent. You can see this by looking at Asian culture and comparing it to American culture. Asian culture seems to embrace the concept of studying and hard work. American media/culture often glorifies the opposite, or it portrays the opposite as normal. As Chris Rock points out, Americans like bragging about not knowing things. Americans brag about how little they work, how easy their job is. It's almost like you're doing something wrong if what you are doing is difficult. I'm guilty of this too. I would take pride in doing well in school while doing little or no work. I would actually look down on people who studied for several hours and got the same grade as me. Why? It's because they were working. They were trying too hard. They were too disciplined.
Now apply that same mentality to the ghetto and guess what should be the result. The kids who do well might actually lose the respect of their peers because it looks like they are trying too hard, they are putting in too many hours studying, they're not keeping it real.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but it would probably take decades of social engineering. Americans need to be trained that hard work is a good thing. Studying is honorable. It's ok if you had to struggle with a problem for a few hours before solving it.

 

[IronWing]

Yes, the school and the teachers should be held responsible. Schools ignore students who learn besides the lecture style of teaching.

And, forcing someone to do something against their will without financial compensation is slavery. Students are robbed of their freedom with no due process and sent to a government institution against their will.

I love you so much my heart is bursting. :wub:

 

[MovingTarget]

Your wife isn't the only educator that has noticed the difference between public and private schools.

Nor is she the only one to observe that their funding isn't what makes the difference...

Uno

I had posted another reply here earlier, but I got a little too off-topic when I climbed on my soapbox. Money won't solve all of education's problems. However, it certainly helps alleviate most of them. You cannot put students first by placing teachers last. Support them and give them the autonomy they need in the classroom.

 

[Texashiker]

You cannot put students first by placing teachers last. Support them and give them the autonomy they need in the classroom.

That clearly defines who is the master and who is the slave.

Teachers are granted unbridled freedom through taxation and forced servitude.

Teachers are a public servant and should be treated as such. If you do not produce a quality product, you're fired. Each child is a unfinished widget that should be polished by the teacher.

The teachers job is not one of a black smith to pound the student into what the teacher wants.

A teacher should be more like an artist that should bring out the best of the canvas.

 

[MovingTarget]

That clearly defines who is the master and who is the slave.

Teachers are granted unbridled freedom through taxation and forced servitude.

Teachers are a public servant and should be treated as such. If you do not produce a quality product, you're fired. Each child is a unfinished widget that should be polished by the teacher.

The teachers job is not one of a black smith to pound the student into what the teacher wants.

A teacher should be more like an artist that should bring out the best of the canvas.

If you cannot tell the difference between a master/slave and student/teacher relationship, then I don't know what to tell you here. Either you hold onto a rather juvenile image of what teachers do, or you haven't been inside a classroom in ages. Probably both. Education isn't about "pounding/polishing widgets" or "producing product". Even your own examples show you want it both ways - a teacher is an artist trying to bring out the best in a canvas, and yet, must produce an emotionally detached product that merely checks the boxes on some standardized list.

It may surprise you that teachers may want to *gasp* teach students how to think critically about their subject. Most of us go into teaching because we are passionate about what we know and want to share/impart that knowledge and passion to others, not to simply regurgitate what is on some state exam while providing a glorified babysitting service. These days, teachers are required to do just about everything but teach and are often placed in situations where it is near impossible to address the actual needs of their students.

 

[Texashiker]

If you cannot tell the difference between a master/slave and student/teacher relationship, then I don't know what to tell you here. <snip>

Between the student and the teacher:

Which one goes to the school building freely, and which one is required by law to go, and punished when they do not comply?

Which one is financially compensated for their time?

Which one can get up and leave at anytime?

Which one can inflict physical harm upon the other?