Emotional needs of our students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quotes got messed up - this was my reply:

I never said that. You know it. You are twisting it because you or someone else like yourself admitted that you feel the bar should be lowered because these kids can't be expected to get in on their own merit. I, on the other hand believe they can.

When you have people like yourself legislating on this belief, the net result is one group has to work much harder than another for the same benefit. And you think that's not stressful? How do you feel when one or two people on your team don't do their share of the work and you have to work overtime and weekends to make up for it. Pretty damn stressed, right?

I absolutely do not think the bar should be lower for black and Hispanic kids. I think they should be held to the same standards as whites and Asians. I also don't think that white kids with lower scores than Asian kids should get in over the more qualified Asian kid, which is happening more frequently now. The kids in this area are more stressed about competing with their white and Asian peers, and about fulfilling their parents' expectations , than about whether a Hispanic kid from Jeb Stuart will take their spot at their school of choice. This victim mentality you are espousing is just as detrimental as the lower threshold that you are arguing against. I most certainly will not be teaching my kids anything of that nature, and they will be better off for it.

[Anonymous]

Your post is too absurd. Yes, there are a few bad apples...as there are in every profession. That's great that your friend cares, but she is not the exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid from Buchanan County have AP courses, SAT study class, private tutors and multiple opportunities to take the SAT and ACTs? Did the same kid have the time and opportunity to play club volleyball, train with professional coaches and play tournaments all over the world? Has the kid seen in person the Taj Mahal, the Himeji Castle and attend the Pope's Easter Mass? I could go on and on and on.
So, yeah, if that kid gets an advantage in college admissions, I won't cry foul.

Apparently, yes http://www.wyzant.com/Buchanan_County_VA_ap_economics_tutors.aspx

So wealthy kids should be penalized. Got it. By the way? My kids have done none of those things. My husband helps with math and science. They are not world-traveled and do not train with coaches or play tournaments all over the world. Matter of fact, none of my friends kids have, though some have gone on service trips.

I'm beginning to see the animosity towards kids from schools like Langley, from some in Northern VA and from some teachers. No wonder these kids feel it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quotes got messed up - this was my reply:

I never said that. You know it. You are twisting it because you or someone else like yourself admitted that you feel the bar should be lowered because these kids can't be expected to get in on their own merit. I, on the other hand believe they can.

When you have people like yourself legislating on this belief, the net result is one group has to work much harder than another for the same benefit. And you think that's not stressful? How do you feel when one or two people on your team don't do their share of the work and you have to work overtime and weekends to make up for it. Pretty damn stressed, right?

I absolutely do not think the bar should be lower for black and Hispanic kids. I think they should be held to the same standards as whites and Asians. I also don't think that white kids with lower scores than Asian kids should get in over the more qualified Asian kid, which is happening more frequently now. The kids in this area are more stressed about competing with their white and Asian peers, and about fulfilling their parents' expectations , than about whether a Hispanic kid from Jeb Stuart will take their spot at their school of choice. This victim mentality you are espousing is just as detrimental as the lower threshold that you are arguing against. I most certainly will not be teaching my kids anything of that nature, and they will be better off for it.

They don't see that. Those biases towards them are 'under the hood'. They don't understand why they are competing with each other for those coveted spots, that the reason is, is because of the politics of fairness.

There is no victim mentality. It's simply the truth. When kids find out that there are other factors at play, they are actually relieved because they realize that some of it is not in their control, and never was. They then begin to accept that these schools aren't 'all that' and that there are plenty of other schools out there for them that are wonderful. THAT is what relieves their stress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your post is too absurd. Yes, there are a few bad apples...as there are in every profession. That's great that your friend cares, but she is not the exception.

Her experiences tell me that she is. We've been friends for damn near 40 years and I can tell you, what I've learned from her is appalling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid from Buchanan County have AP courses, SAT study class, private tutors and multiple opportunities to take the SAT and ACTs? Did the same kid have the time and opportunity to play club volleyball, train with professional coaches and play tournaments all over the world? Has the kid seen in person the Taj Mahal, the Himeji Castle and attend the Pope's Easter Mass? I could go on and on and on.
So, yeah, if that kid gets an advantage in college admissions, I won't cry foul.

Apparently, yes http://www.wyzant.com/Buchanan_County_VA_ap_economics_tutors.aspx

So wealthy kids should be penalized. Got it. By the way? My kids have done none of those things. My husband helps with math and science. They are not world-traveled and do not train with coaches or play tournaments all over the world. Matter of fact, none of my friends kids have, though some have gone on service trips.

I'm beginning to see the animosity towards kids from schools like Langley, from some in Northern VA and from some teachers. No wonder these kids feel it!

Your kid had not SAT prep at all? No opportunity to take the test more than once? No AP classes? Interesting.
Some consider it "leveling the playing field" to give an advantage (not a penalty for those more fortunate). But I see you disagree but why?
What's your point about animosity? Where did that come from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quotes got messed up - this was my reply:

I never said that. You know it. You are twisting it because you or someone else like yourself admitted that you feel the bar should be lowered because these kids can't be expected to get in on their own merit. I, on the other hand believe they can.

When you have people like yourself legislating on this belief, the net result is one group has to work much harder than another for the same benefit. And you think that's not stressful? How do you feel when one or two people on your team don't do their share of the work and you have to work overtime and weekends to make up for it. Pretty damn stressed, right?

I absolutely do not think the bar should be lower for black and Hispanic kids. I think they should be held to the same standards as whites and Asians. I also don't think that white kids with lower scores than Asian kids should get in over the more qualified Asian kid, which is happening more frequently now. The kids in this area are more stressed about competing with their white and Asian peers, and about fulfilling their parents' expectations , than about whether a Hispanic kid from Jeb Stuart will take their spot at their school of choice. This victim mentality you are espousing is just as detrimental as the lower threshold that you are arguing against. I most certainly will not be teaching my kids anything of that nature, and they will be better off for it.

They don't see that. Those biases towards them are 'under the hood'. They don't understand why they are competing with each other for those coveted spots, that the reason is, is because of the politics of fairness.

There is no victim mentality. It's simply the truth. When kids find out that there are other factors at play, they are actually relieved because they realize that some of it is not in their control, and never was. They then begin to accept that these schools aren't 'all that' and that there are plenty of other schools out there for them that are wonderful. THAT is what relieves their stress.

I hope you are as passionate about fairness for Asian students and as outspoken against legacies with lower scores. I doubt either is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quotes got messed up - this was my reply:

I never said that. You know it. You are twisting it because you or someone else like yourself admitted that you feel the bar should be lowered because these kids can't be expected to get in on their own merit. I, on the other hand believe they can.

When you have people like yourself legislating on this belief, the net result is one group has to work much harder than another for the same benefit. And you think that's not stressful? How do you feel when one or two people on your team don't do their share of the work and you have to work overtime and weekends to make up for it. Pretty damn stressed, right?

I absolutely do not think the bar should be lower for black and Hispanic kids. I think they should be held to the same standards as whites and Asians. I also don't think that white kids with lower scores than Asian kids should get in over the more qualified Asian kid, which is happening more frequently now. The kids in this area are more stressed about competing with their white and Asian peers, and about fulfilling their parents' expectations , than about whether a Hispanic kid from Jeb Stuart will take their spot at their school of choice. This victim mentality you are espousing is just as detrimental as the lower threshold that you are arguing against. I most certainly will not be teaching my kids anything of that nature, and they will be better off for it.

They don't see that. Those biases towards them are 'under the hood'. They don't understand why they are competing with each other for those coveted spots, that the reason is, is because of the politics of fairness.

There is no victim mentality. It's simply the truth. When kids find out that there are other factors at play, they are actually relieved because they realize that some of it is not in their control, and never was. They then begin to accept that these schools aren't 'all that' and that there are plenty of other schools out there for them that are wonderful. THAT is what relieves their stress.

I hope you are as passionate about fairness for Asian students and as outspoken against legacies with lower scores. I doubt either is true.

Indeed I am. I don't like the idea of legacies at all. AT ALL. Get in on your own merit. Regarding Asian students, I thought they were considered white on college apps and not given minority status?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid from Buchanan County have AP courses, SAT study class, private tutors and multiple opportunities to take the SAT and ACTs? Did the same kid have the time and opportunity to play club volleyball, train with professional coaches and play tournaments all over the world? Has the kid seen in person the Taj Mahal, the Himeji Castle and attend the Pope's Easter Mass? I could go on and on and on.
So, yeah, if that kid gets an advantage in college admissions, I won't cry foul.

Apparently, yes http://www.wyzant.com/Buchanan_County_VA_ap_economics_tutors.aspx

So wealthy kids should be penalized. Got it. By the way? My kids have done none of those things. My husband helps with math and science. They are not world-traveled and do not train with coaches or play tournaments all over the world. Matter of fact, none of my friends kids have, though some have gone on service trips.

I'm beginning to see the animosity towards kids from schools like Langley, from some in Northern VA and from some teachers. No wonder these kids feel it!

Your kid had not SAT prep at all? No opportunity to take the test more than once? No AP classes? Interesting.
Some consider it "leveling the playing field" to give an advantage (not a penalty for those more fortunate). But I see you disagree but why?
What's your point about animosity? Where did that come from?

No prep. None. Nada. They study on their own. No AP classes to date. My daughter might take some senior year. Buchanan County offers them too, by the way, AND tutoring if you choose. That's just not how we roll in our household. Sorry to disappoint.

And poorer kids can get fee waivers from the SAT board:

http://sat.collegeboard.org/register/sat-fee-waivers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid from Buchanan County have AP courses, SAT study class, private tutors and multiple opportunities to take the SAT and ACTs? Did the same kid have the time and opportunity to play club volleyball, train with professional coaches and play tournaments all over the world? Has the kid seen in person the Taj Mahal, the Himeji Castle and attend the Pope's Easter Mass? I could go on and on and on.
So, yeah, if that kid gets an advantage in college admissions, I won't cry foul.

Apparently, yes http://www.wyzant.com/Buchanan_County_VA_ap_economics_tutors.aspx

So wealthy kids should be penalized. Got it. By the way? My kids have done none of those things. My husband helps with math and science. They are not world-traveled and do not train with coaches or play tournaments all over the world. Matter of fact, none of my friends kids have, though some have gone on service trips.

I'm beginning to see the animosity towards kids from schools like Langley, from some in Northern VA and from some teachers. No wonder these kids feel it!

Your kid had not SAT prep at all? No opportunity to take the test more than once? No AP classes? Interesting.
Some consider it "leveling the playing field" to give an advantage (not a penalty for those more fortunate). But I see you disagree but why?
What's your point about animosity? Where did that come from?

When someone brings up sports all over the world, travels all over the world, etc, they are stereotyping a particular group of people, as if they are all Donald Trump's kids. They are not. It's as hostile as saying all poor kids are stupid.

When you level something, you rise one part up and bring another part down to make things equal. Think of a balance scale. The higher side is brought down in order to bring the lower side up. This is not advantageous when it comes to education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Do you believe black and Hispanic children should have a lower threshold (grades and lower test scores) to college entry than a white person or Asian person? Yes or no

I think children from disadvantaged backgrounds, regardless of color, should not be denied entrance to a college because they have lacked the same opportunities of others. I do think that colleges should consider these factors.

Do I think this is fair? I don't think that question is relevant. You might as we'll ask me if it is salty. There are no objective, hard requirements for entrance to the Ivy League, and no guarantee of admission, so the notion that you are being "denied" something you have "earned" is completely wrongheaded.

I also think it is complete and utter horseshit that upper income parents are blaming black and Hispanic kids for "denying" their snowflakes something to which they feel entitled. How come no ones panties are in a knot when athletes get into the Ivy League with lower grades and scores? Or when the children of the rich and famous get in with lower scores? That kind of "unfairness" seems to get a pass, yet I suspect it happens far more frequently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking from experience as someone who has taught in California and also had my own children as students in that state, tenured teachers coasting to retirement are the very last people in a school that you need to worry about putting undo pressure on or destroying the fragile self esteem of students.

You who keeps blaming them is barking up the wrong tree without a doubt.

My friend, who has taught in CA for 20 years, begs to differ. She has sat on teams where they want to bring back ebonics and/or is told that she must grade improper English as correct because the bar must be lowered for these students. She refuses. She gets kids pushed through the system (she teaches 6th grade), thrown at her, with a 'good luck with this one'. As she put it, she's just narcissistic enough to want to prove those teachers wrong. And she does EVERY time. By the time those kids leave her classroom, they are prepared for 7th grade - she has brought some up multiple grade levels simply by changing how she teaches those children. And she has large classes - no excuse, she says. I have personally sent her iPads and other tools when she can't get them from the district. She does a lot of tactile projects. She had one kid who thought he was a failure, was always in detention, etc. Within two weeks she had pinpointed a suspected learning disability, set up testing, and had it confirmed. Kid went from failing to straight As. He was plenty smart - why didn't the other teachers notice or care? Did the parents care? Yes. They were Asian and spoke very little English and had no idea what was going on. They were at a loss. The administration didn't reach out to them. The guidance counselor did not reach out to them. The school board did not reach out to them. My friend did.

And THAT'S how you fix a school. By keeping teachers like my friend and getting RID of those that aren't.

This year, she happens to have the student of a parent who is a very famous businessman. She had no idea until he contacted her after her 'welcome to my classroom, this is how I teach' letter. She caught his attention in very positive ways. This should get good.

Well, then your friend is not a tenured teacher skating to retirement.

Ask her about those. I am sure she has many stories of this kind of teacher.

I have seen those teachers come to school, get their coffee, read their paper, take naps during class, and not give a single bit of classwork for the entire year. I have seen the president of the teachers union come to school, pop in a movie (rated R in some cases, such as the movie Seven), every single day and call it a high school psychology class. Both of those teachers were untouchable. One got paid off by the district to take early retirement; the district looked the other way with the president of the teachers union, in spite of constant parent complaints. I could go on and on.

There are many teachers in that state who are wonderful, dedicated professionals, but there are just as many tenured teachers who know they can't be fired, short of getting caught molesting a child.

Your friend is not the standard, she is the exception.

And if dcum parents are bitching about tenured teachers putting too much pressure on the kids, they really don't know what the hell they are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid from Buchanan County have AP courses, SAT study class, private tutors and multiple opportunities to take the SAT and ACTs? Did the same kid have the time and opportunity to play club volleyball, train with professional coaches and play tournaments all over the world? Has the kid seen in person the Taj Mahal, the Himeji Castle and attend the Pope's Easter Mass? I could go on and on and on.
So, yeah, if that kid gets an advantage in college admissions, I won't cry foul.

Apparently, yes http://www.wyzant.com/Buchanan_County_VA_ap_economics_tutors.aspx

So wealthy kids should be penalized. Got it. By the way? My kids have done none of those things. My husband helps with math and science. They are not world-traveled and do not train with coaches or play tournaments all over the world. Matter of fact, none of my friends kids have, though some have gone on service trips.

I'm beginning to see the animosity towards kids from schools like Langley, from some in Northern VA and from some teachers. No wonder these kids feel it!

Your kid had not SAT prep at all? No opportunity to take the test more than once? No AP classes? Interesting.
Some consider it "leveling the playing field" to give an advantage (not a penalty for those more fortunate). But I see you disagree but why?
What's your point about animosity? Where did that come from?

No prep. None. Nada. They study on their own. No AP classes to date. My daughter might take some senior year. Buchanan County offers them too, by the way, AND tutoring if you choose. That's just not how we roll in our household. Sorry to disappoint.

And poorer kids can get fee waivers from the SAT board:

http://sat.collegeboard.org/register/sat-fee-waivers

So you sound very calm about the whole college thing. What then is the problem? Why are you simultaneously so calm that you take a completely nada approach to prep, etc, and yet so stressed out that your kid might not get into a top college? Why are you here worrying about your kids' emotional needs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking from experience as someone who has taught in California and also had my own children as students in that state, tenured teachers coasting to retirement are the very last people in a school that you need to worry about putting undo pressure on or destroying the fragile self esteem of students.

You who keeps blaming them is barking up the wrong tree without a doubt.

My friend, who has taught in CA for 20 years, begs to differ. She has sat on teams where they want to bring back ebonics and/or is told that she must grade improper English as correct because the bar must be lowered for these students. She refuses. She gets kids pushed through the system (she teaches 6th grade), thrown at her, with a 'good luck with this one'. As she put it, she's just narcissistic enough to want to prove those teachers wrong. And she does EVERY time. By the time those kids leave her classroom, they are prepared for 7th grade - she has brought some up multiple grade levels simply by changing how she teaches those children. And she has large classes - no excuse, she says. I have personally sent her iPads and other tools when she can't get them from the district. She does a lot of tactile projects. She had one kid who thought he was a failure, was always in detention, etc. Within two weeks she had pinpointed a suspected learning disability, set up testing, and had it confirmed. Kid went from failing to straight As. He was plenty smart - why didn't the other teachers notice or care? Did the parents care? Yes. They were Asian and spoke very little English and had no idea what was going on. They were at a loss. The administration didn't reach out to them. The guidance counselor did not reach out to them. The school board did not reach out to them. My friend did.

And THAT'S how you fix a school. By keeping teachers like my friend and getting RID of those that aren't.

This year, she happens to have the student of a parent who is a very famous businessman. She had no idea until he contacted her after her 'welcome to my classroom, this is how I teach' letter. She caught his attention in very positive ways. This should get good.

That's all very interesting, but what do teachers like this have to do with stressful educational environments in schools like Langley? Are you saying that kids at Langley are stressed out because some of their teachers are trying to teach Ebonics? Are you saying that they are stressed out because Langley teacher expectations are too low? Or...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking from experience as someone who has taught in California and also had my own children as students in that state, tenured teachers coasting to retirement are the very last people in a school that you need to worry about putting undo pressure on or destroying the fragile self esteem of students.

You who keeps blaming them is barking up the wrong tree without a doubt.

My friend, who has taught in CA for 20 years, begs to differ. She has sat on teams where they want to bring back ebonics and/or is told that she must grade improper English as correct because the bar must be lowered for these students. She refuses. She gets kids pushed through the system (she teaches 6th grade), thrown at her, with a 'good luck with this one'. As she put it, she's just narcissistic enough to want to prove those teachers wrong. And she does EVERY time. By the time those kids leave her classroom, they are prepared for 7th grade - she has brought some up multiple grade levels simply by changing how she teaches those children. And she has large classes - no excuse, she says. I have personally sent her iPads and other tools when she can't get them from the district. She does a lot of tactile projects. She had one kid who thought he was a failure, was always in detention, etc. Within two weeks she had pinpointed a suspected learning disability, set up testing, and had it confirmed. Kid went from failing to straight As. He was plenty smart - why didn't the other teachers notice or care? Did the parents care? Yes. They were Asian and spoke very little English and had no idea what was going on. They were at a loss. The administration didn't reach out to them. The guidance counselor did not reach out to them. The school board did not reach out to them. My friend did.

And THAT'S how you fix a school. By keeping teachers like my friend and getting RID of those that aren't.

This year, she happens to have the student of a parent who is a very famous businessman. She had no idea until he contacted her after her 'welcome to my classroom, this is how I teach' letter. She caught his attention in very positive ways. This should get good.

Well, then your friend is not a tenured teacher skating to retirement.

Ask her about those. I am sure she has many stories of this kind of teacher.

I have seen those teachers come to school, get their coffee, read their paper, take naps during class, and not give a single bit of classwork for the entire year. I have seen the president of the teachers union come to school, pop in a movie (rated R in some cases, such as the movie Seven), every single day and call it a high school psychology class. Both of those teachers were untouchable. One got paid off by the district to take early retirement; the district looked the other way with the president of the teachers union, in spite of constant parent complaints. I could go on and on.

There are many teachers in that state who are wonderful, dedicated professionals, but there are just as many tenured teachers who know they can't be fired, short of getting caught molesting a child.

Your friend is not the standard, she is the exception.

And if dcum parents are bitching about tenured teachers putting too much pressure on the kids, they really don't know what the hell they are talking about.

And of course the irony is that these kinds of teachers are far more likely to be found in failing schools than in schools like Langley.

It is positively hilarious that this is even a topic of discussion. Teacher tenure is what leads to student stress? LMAO.