Is how we teach school for little kids outdated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So as a teacher you want me to let go of the whole gaining work and critical thinking skills to become a democratic citizen and contributing member of our society for……. Sailing.

Ok- I mean what with global warming out door survival skills (how to deal with extreme flooding and heat) will be more important anyway so I can see your point.

We need teachers like you to leave the profession. God you sound crazy [b]😨

Op I agree with you. It’s a long, boring day for many kids. My son was well behaved and loved by his teachers, but was miserable at school. He didn’t like school until 7th grade. He’s almost done with high school and still talks about how much he hated elementary school! But he’s happy in high school. I hope things get better for your son.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School here is too long.
School is 4-5 hours max in EE in early grades with recess between each class. Kids get themselves to school and back, and learn just as much outside of school as they learn at school. Never heard of parents getting arrested for not being home when their school-aged kids are at home. School starts at 7 years of age and most 7-year olds can be trusted to themselves to school/home and be home alone. They also get themselves to after school activities. Most public schools are good; few kids travel longer than 20 minutes to school.

That’s because people in the U.S. demand a free (yes, it’s free to you, no, your tiny percentage of property taxes that goes directly to public school comes nowhere *near* covering it) place to park their kids while they work. Most of them even jam their kids into aftercare to make their days even longer.

Um no, capitalism demands that people work demanding hours. See the 40 page thread debating the Junior staffer who didn’t want to work after 6 pm.

[Anonymous]

It seems that the vestiges of old tradition survive pointlessly and all the good parts have been dropped while the best of the new hasn't been adopted. From too much structure to not at all, from cartoonish discipline to none at all.

[Anonymous]

I work as a related service provider in secondary. I spend a lot of time observing in mixed classrooms (from honors kids to struggling to read). I consistently see classroom teachers calling on the "higher" kids to answer questions, just so they can keep teaching and not slow down to wait for the "lower" kids to understand. There's too much material to get through to slow down, but then my SPED kids get ignored. I would much rather see differentiated classrooms, with scaled back curriculums. Because as it stands now the "lower" kids aren't getting much of anything of of these classes, and in the right setting they would be able to get enough information to benefit.

The gap gets wider and wider as they get older and it becomes nearly impossible to get them back in track.

I don't know what the answer is, but change is most definitely needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want someone to give a straightforward answer why they can't sort classes by ability. I asked every teacher and admin I know socially and they say something like "research shows kids do better in a mixed group" which we all know is bullshit.

Everybody on DC Urban mom loves the idea of warehousing all the low performing kids unless their kid ends up in the stupid class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I work as a related service provider in secondary. I spend a lot of time observing in mixed classrooms (from honors kids to struggling to read). I consistently see classroom teachers calling on the "higher" kids to answer questions, just so they can keep teaching and not slow down to wait for the "lower" kids to understand. There's too much material to get through to slow down, but then my SPED kids get ignored. I would much rather see differentiated classrooms, with scaled back curriculums. Because as it stands now the "lower" kids aren't getting much of anything of of these classes, and in the right setting they would be able to get enough information to benefit.

The gap gets wider and wider as they get older and it becomes nearly impossible to get them back in track.

I don't know what the answer is, but change is most definitely needed.

Mixed ability classes is the answer but public schools are reluctant to have them.

[Anonymous]

Maybe find a private that is a better fit for you child, OP. My child likes to sit still and do schoolwork. She also enjoys running around at the right time. She enjoys school and is not bored.

I do think school should be boring at times. Not all topics are exciting! I wouldn’t switch schools for boredom. But, if my child was struggling because of a disconnect in teaching styles or level of content, then I might. The hard thing to figure out is, will it be better somewhere else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want someone to give a straightforward answer why they can't sort classes by ability. I asked every teacher and admin I know socially and they say something like "research shows kids do better in a mixed group" which we all know is bullshit.

Everybody on DC Urban mom loves the idea of warehousing all the low performing kids unless their kid ends up in the stupid class.

+1. Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

So your child is lazy and does not like to work. All 3 of my kids love school and thrive at working hard in school. It is work for kids at school as it should be. Maybe you should approach it a different way and tell your kid you work at a job and it is not much fun but it must be done. Therefore, you need to work hard at school and learn to get it done and do well in it. Playtime is for summer and I let me kids play and vacation their hearts out. But we work hard at work and school. End the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Schools are designed around the average girl, not the average boy.

This is why the world has a bunch of whiny, overindulged, entitled little snowflakes. Boys who grow into teens and are bored so they shoot up schools, do not go to college at the rate girls do, stay at home until 40, and are not doing well overall. Oh, and let's not talk about the depression and suicide rates. I vote for going back to old school living, like in the 1920's - 50's. That is when there were real men in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had the same concerns for my son and found a local private school that used Saxon Math as well as Bauer's curriculum. While I really liked the curriculum I felt too uncomfortable with the religious aspect of the school as we are a Catholic family and the school was LCMS.

Please, which school was this ? And does LCMS means Lutheran Church Missouri Synod ? We are mainline Protestant Christians, but not very theologically-minded; for you all, were there particular concerns or mainly just the mis-alignment with the Catholic church ?

Is there a particular Catholic school which you liked ? There seem to be a wide range of Catholic schools here - each seems different from others.

Thanks !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had the same concerns for my son and found a local private school that used Saxon Math as well as Bauer's curriculum. While I really liked the curriculum I felt too uncomfortable with the religious aspect of the school as we are a Catholic family and the school was LCMS.

Please, which school was this ? And does LCMS means Lutheran Church Missouri Synod ? We are mainline Protestant Christians, but not very theologically-minded; for you all, were there particular concerns or mainly just the mis-alignment with the Catholic church ?

Is there a particular Catholic school which you liked ? There seem to be a wide range of Catholic schools here - each seems different from others.

Thanks !

Sorry but I am from a different area. the misalignment with catholicism would not have been a big deal at a young age but would have been a mess in the upper grades. I didn't want my child to feel different from his peers.