Future of Education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class size matters. Public per pupil funding does not support small class sizes. Charters and vouchers fail for the same reason

There are very large classes in China, Korea and other Asian countries. It doesn’t seem to affect their education!

China and Japan, I mean. Their average class sizes are far greater than in the U.S. but their students are out performing ours on most measures!

I’m not sure why Americans are so focused on small class size as an indicator of education quality.

The culture in China, Korea, and Japan is far different.

The schools there have no qualms about leaving you behind. There is no compulsory high school in those three countries. In Japan and China you have to pass a test to get into high school, and your future is bleak if you can't get in. That has two effects. The weak students are gone by high school, and the students are serious in their studies by middle school. Korea is a bit different in that almost every kid can get into a high school, but everyone is trying to get into the specialized high schools. Your chances of getting into a top university is very low unless you attend an elite high school, so it leads to the same competitive pressure.

In terms of the classrooms themselves, the teacher does no differentiation. You are responsible for yourself, and you either keep up or you fail. That is why cram schools are so ubiquitous in those countries. The parents are afraid of their kids falling behind. There is also no tolerance for disrespect. Your peers will look down on you, and your parents will punish you.

Given the conditions it's easy to see why those countries can have large class sizes. The teacher does not need to accommodate anyone and classroom behavior is easily enforced.

It's not something America can pull off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those are collective societies. They raise kids to bow to authority so a teacher has no discipline issues. It’s also sink or swim there. If the kid doesn’t understand, the teacher isn’t going to stop or slow down lessons for them.

You have to test into high school in Japan so school is high pressure. If you goof off you don’t get to go. Here you can have kids in your room that are two grades behind, kids that are two grades ahead, and kids with various learning and behavior disabilities and you are supposed to meet all of their needs. Having a 40 kid classroom would be insane here.

[Anonymous]

Bring back tracking and performance based classrooms for core subjects - include all for specials - much better for the teachers because we all know that diversification is impossible with the current classroom dynamics full of all levels and ieps.

[Anonymous]

There’s a really good article from the Washington Post about teachers coming from Asia to fill out public school vacancies here in America. Highly rated and experienced teachers are coming here and struggling to deal with student behavior.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/10/02/teacher-shortage-bullhead-city-arizona/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s a really good article from the Washington Post about teachers coming from Asia to fill out public school vacancies here in America. Highly rated and experienced teachers are coming here and struggling to deal with student behavior.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/10/02/teacher-shortage-bullhead-city-arizona/

It's harder to teach when your students don't spend hours every day at cram schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bring back tracking and performance based classrooms for core subjects - include all for specials - much better for the teachers because we all know that diversification is impossible with the current classroom dynamics full of all levels and ieps.

Agree.

[Anonymous]

Democrats cruelty and mean-spiritedness is behind our failing public educational system.

It is cruel to students to trap them in failing schools with incompetent teachers, but that is exactly what the cruel unions do by fighting against minimum competency standards for teachers.

It is cruel to all levels of students to eliminate advanced learning (ie NYC, Seattle, California, etc), but also cruel to unrealistically “mainstream” special Ed students into regular classes; where BOTH groups are unable to learn.

Lucy Calkins was an experiment, tested on human subjects (your kids) which was a failure; yet Berkeley is still forcing this cruel joke on kids.

Same goes for “whole language” to replace phonics; it was cruel democrats who backed “whole language” for years. It was so politically one-sided that they used to run ads selling phonics curriculums to parents on the Rush Limbaugh show.

Democrats are cruel, mean people.

[Anonymous]

Road to hell is paved with good intentions basically nails the progressives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay teachers more. Better pay = better teachers.

I think the funds would be better spent by reducing the credentials needed for teaching to a 2-year vocational program, reducing teacher compensation by 35%-50%, but then hiring twice to three times as many teachers to reduce class sizes to no more than 15 kids per class.

Which is to say that academic outcomes will improve more with a greater number of less-qualified teachers, than with fewer but higher-qualified teachers.

Peer reviewed research does not support this approach. I'm not interested in having my kid taught by someone making 30k per year, who can't afford to either live near school or have decent transportation.

The correlation between class size and results is also low.

Peer-reviewed research is how we got in this mess. We are up to our neck in peer-reviewed research, almost all of which is going to recommend Leftist solutions whether the data points that way or not.

What we lack are consequences for parents and kids who cause problems & don’t take opportunities seriously. And I don’t need a mountain of data to tell me that.

That’s racist.

[Anonymous]

The fact that you think that’s racist kinda makes you look like the racist

[Anonymous]

It's also hard to teach when the kids respond to a request to opening a book with
" STFU _________ (insert derogatory Asian
racial slur here)*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Give up and be okay with the idea that you can’t treat everyone equitably. If kids can’t behave in a classroom setting, they need to removed from said classroom. Screw their fair and adequate education. Mainly focus on those who want to learn.

This is the main thing that would improve schools dramatically. Get disruptive kids out. If they don’t want to be there they shouldn’t be there. If their parents want them in school, they can teach them to behave.

They could learn at an on the job program to do useful things like fix roads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class size matters. Public per pupil funding does not support small class sizes. Charters and vouchers fail for the same reason

There are very large classes in China, Korea and other Asian countries. It doesn’t seem to affect their education!

China and Japan, I mean. Their average class sizes are far greater than in the U.S. but their students are out performing ours on most measures!

I’m not sure why Americans are so focused on small class size as an indicator of education quality.

The culture in China, Korea, and Japan is far different.

The schools there have no qualms about leaving you behind. There is no compulsory high school in those three countries. In Japan and China you have to pass a test to get into high school, and your future is bleak if you can't get in. That has two effects. The weak students are gone by high school, and the students are serious in their studies by middle school. Korea is a bit different in that almost every kid can get into a high school, but everyone is trying to get into the specialized high schools. Your chances of getting into a top university is very low unless you attend an elite high school, so it leads to the same competitive pressure.

In terms of the classrooms themselves, the teacher does no differentiation. You are responsible for yourself, and you either keep up or you fail. That is why cram schools are so ubiquitous in those countries. The parents are afraid of their kids falling behind. There is also no tolerance for disrespect. Your peers will look down on you, and your parents will punish you.

Given the conditions it's easy to see why those countries can have large class sizes. The teacher does not need to accommodate anyone and classroom behavior is easily enforced.

It's not something America can pull off.

Compare the success of the Asian systems with the US in 2024:

- we increasingly refuse to suspend or expel teen students no matter how disruptive they are or how detrimental their behavior is to the students around them.

Why are we tolerating the few truly troublesome kids who ruin education for the entire class?

In what way is that fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pay teachers more. Better pay = better teachers.

And give them a 401k instead of those fat pensions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay teachers more. Better pay = better teachers.

I don’t think it’s merely the pay.

I’d take fewer hours over more pay. The hours in the building are INTENSE with no break and then I spend 2.5-3 extra hours every night preparing for the next day.

+1,000,000
Give me a smaller class with more focused teaching responsibilities, with time to PLAN, and I could do so much more for our kids.