Reply to Did schools used to have behavioral problems like they do now?

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "Did schools used to have behavioral problems like they do now? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Were schools like this a generation ago? I don't remember anything like the behavioral problems we have now. We pulled my oldest several weeks before school ended because she was assaulted and her class was a mess. They were evacuated so many times throughout the year, at least weekly. My son's class was the same. And it was the same before too. Teachers can barely teach now because the kids can't sit still, won't be quiet, argue, and are hurting other kids. I know multiple teachers who have been assaulted and have left teaching because of it. Several parents banded together to go to the principal, but the principal was completely on the side of the abusive kids.

As a parent I'm not even sure what I should do. Is this a new thing? Are kids more violent? I do remember violent fights in high school, but we called police in to stop it (and kids got arrested, expelled, and sent to juvie). I just don't remember anything in elementary. DH and I are touring private schools, but we have 3 kids and at 20-25k, we aren't sure we can afford it for all 3. I'm really concerned about middle school because the kids are bigger and can cause more damage. [/quote]

Yes and no.

A generation or two ago, kids who had these behavioral issues were sent to specialized schools and warehoused, if they had an IEP, or ended up being suspended and expelled and sent to alternative schools. A good number of the kids dropped out of school when they could.

People were not happy with the high percentage of kids dropping out or graduating with out a basic degree and more emphasis was placed on helping kids learn. [b]Not a bad thing but the push to move more kids in mainstream classes, to stop the warehousing,  and address kids issues instead of punishing straight away has led to more issues in the mainstream class and fewer resources to address the problems that some kids have.

There was also the tats that showed that minorities and kids with IEPs were punished more harshly then non-minorities so policies were put in place to try and address issues without suspensions and expulsion. THe problem is that the solutions have failed and the kids stay in school and are more disruptive. [/b]And now that funding is tied to attendence and graduation rates, kids are being passed from grade to grade without learning anything. Schools bend over backwards to prevent kids from being expelled or dropping out. 
[/quote]

I agree with this poster. Philosophies have changed about how to handle certain types of students.

I have a high school friend who became an elementary school teacher. I met him in an elective class in 9th grade.  He was bright but an undiagnosed dyslexic so actually had been held back a lot (Kindergarten 2 times, lowest math track, etc.).

I was in the screened-in gifted student track.  He was in the low track until he matured and started having different priorities and pulling himself out of the "not going to college" track.  When we talk about our shared high school, I had no experience studying with kids with behavioral difficulties in high school but he did.  The lower track of kids also got the worst teachers/teachers who were apathetic.  He eventually went to college, got multiple degrees, and became an excellent teacher who can help all types of kids to maximize their academic growth.  He understands how to address and remediate issues that didn't use to get handled.

Flash forward to my own kids.  My school district has no formal tracking (until eligible  for high school AP classes).  Because there was no tracking in elementary school, my kids were underchallenged, phoning it in, etc.  Particularly in math.  And they did have kids with behavioral and learning IEPs in their classrooms.  The kids with issues do attract notice and can derail daily lesson plans and group projects.  I was asked by a 3rd grade teacher whether my younger kid should go to a private school for gifted kids but I decided not to do that.  In part because I'd learned through life experience that having good people skills is more important on the job than being really smart (learned the hard way).

It's definitely true that public education seems worse than in my childhood because of the insistence on mainstreaming disruptive children. Allegedly, these equity initiatives are beneficial overall.  I wonder if those findings are rigorous and will hold up over time.  What I see happening is that people buy into expensive school districts to minimize the chances that their kids' education will be severely impacted by current educational philosophies.  Wealthy school districts can better manage support services, breakout classes, and special ed tracks that are satisfactory to the parents of kids with IEPs.  And there's still a strong relationship between parental affluence and student performance.  I decided to go a different, more equitable way, and I do see some negative consequences.  If I had tiger parented, I might have been able to avoid more of them.  But I've walked right up to the line of pushing too much with my younger kid.  I did spend quite a bit on math tutoring but not sure it made up for lower classroom standards in elementary.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics