Anonymous wrote:They did. There were many more high school dropouts in the past.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents don’t parent. DD 16 is a lifeguard and came home yesterday talking about a gentle parent trying to negotiate with her kid for several minutes to get out of the pool during break. Even teen DD could see it was a snowflake approach.

The kid whose parent has the wherewithal to be calm and patient in that situation instead of grabbing the kid by the arm and dragging him out of the pool, or screaming at him, is not the kid who is having the massive meltdown in class that gets the classroom evacuated. The gentle parented kid might have other issues if his parents don't figure out how to set limits, but the truth is that a parent willing to spend several minutes talking to their kid when they aren't doing what they've been told is demonstrating patience and emotional regulation, which is still better than screaming and yanking your kid around in terms of teaching them how to behave.

I know making fun of parents doing "gentle parenting" is a favorite pastime around these parts, but that's not what is leading to kids who throw chairs or scream at people in middle school.

A parent who negotiates like that is doing a disservice to their future adult child.

A boss isn't going to negotiate with you. A cop isn't going to negotiate with you.
A romantic partner isn't going to negotiate with you.

No one is advocating yanking a child around.

But that isn't the first time that child has ignored their parent. If there were consequences like "Johnny, it is pool break time. If you don't get out like everyone else the consequence is we will leave this pool" I suspect Johnny would have gotten out of the pool the first time.

As it is I bet that child was bribed out of the pool with a promise of snacks which isn't very different from how principals handle things nowadays.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My oldest started in a school overseas. Never any behavior problems there. The kids, including my son were TERRIFIED to get sent to the principals office and get a write up. This mindset was instilled from Kindergarten. We then moved back to FCPS for grade 2 and the classroom was a zoo, kids wandering allover the classroom, out of control talking, nobody ever went to the principal, games going on the computer during class etc. My son quickly realized he too can do these things without consequence. It's been a rough ride.

Our principal says he doesn’t want to be the one giving out consequences or reading a kid the riot act because he wants them to perceive him as an ally and someone in their corner. Our counselors do this whole “oh, you feel like Ms. Smith is targeting you? What could she do differently?” thing. And then they put the teacher and student in a room to mediate and “repair the relationship” and the student brags about how he got the teacher in trouble.

Basically nothing negative is to happen to a child, ever, and if a child feels something negative, the teacher is expected to fix it.

This is nonsense and one reason why no one should be in an admin role unless 1. They’ve been a classroom teacher for at least 10 years and 2. They are required to sub in every classroom on a rotating basis for at least half a day throughout the school year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My oldest started in a school overseas. Never any behavior problems there. The kids, including my son were TERRIFIED to get sent to the principals office and get a write up. This mindset was instilled from Kindergarten. We then moved back to FCPS for grade 2 and the classroom was a zoo, kids wandering allover the classroom, out of control talking, nobody ever went to the principal, games going on the computer during class etc. My son quickly realized he too can do these things without consequence. It's been a rough ride.

Our principal says he doesn’t want to be the one giving out consequences or reading a kid the riot act because he wants them to perceive him as an ally and someone in their corner. Our counselors do this whole “oh, you feel like Ms. Smith is targeting you? What could she do differently?” thing. And then they put the teacher and student in a room to mediate and “repair the relationship” and the student brags about how he got the teacher in trouble.

Basically nothing negative is to happen to a child, ever, and if a child feels something negative, the teacher is expected to fix it.

Anonymous wrote:

My oldest started in a school overseas. Never any behavior problems there. The kids, including my son were TERRIFIED to get sent to the principals office and get a write up. This mindset was instilled from Kindergarten. We then moved back to FCPS for grade 2 and the classroom was a zoo, kids wandering allover the classroom, out of control talking, nobody ever went to the principal, games going on the computer during class etc. My son quickly realized he too can do these things without consequence. It's been a rough ride.

Anonymous wrote:Adding to what everyone else said who works in a school three other factors have also happened:

1) The rate of juvenile incarceration has dropped dramatically and is around 70%. This would be a good thing if the money states were saving actually went to helping delinquent kids. Instead nothing much happens to juvenile delinquents and they are kept in public schools in regular junior highs and high schools where way too many of them are wrecking havoc. If parents can't control their teenagers and they are out at night stealing from stores, stealing cars, or assaulting others and actually get arrested, most are just released back home that night. How respectful do you think those teens are to their teachers and classmates?

2) Secondly, it used to be if a student was destroying a classroom, throwing heavy objects like staplers at teachers and classmates, biting, kicking, and hitting, and trying to smash computer equipment the student would be restrained, removed from the class, and secluded from that class and peers until they calmed down. Now schools are really no longer allowed to do much besides evacuate the class and some poor aide or special ed teacher has to just block the attack. It is really heartbreaking to see the bruises and scars so many special education teachers and aides have.

Imagine someone destroying a Target and throwing bottles and other objects, knocking over displays and the police arrive and have to wait the person out until they get tired of raging out of control.

3) Behavior plans all have to focus on rewarding positive behavior. There isn't much that can be written about consequences such as if you are aggressive despite all of things that are being done to improve your behavior you will lose recess, be suspended, have to write lines, etc. So smart kids soon realize there is nothing that the school can to them. They just need to earn enough point to get their reward and acting awful won't cancel getting your reward because they earned enough points to get it. Other kids soon realize the worst behaved kid gets the best rewards. And some disruptive kids realize it is much more rewarding to disrupt a class over earning some extra free time, or iPad time, or Lego time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents don’t parent. DD 16 is a lifeguard and came home yesterday talking about a gentle parent trying to negotiate with her kid for several minutes to get out of the pool during break. Even teen DD could see it was a snowflake approach.

The kid whose parent has the wherewithal to be calm and patient in that situation instead of grabbing the kid by the arm and dragging him out of the pool, or screaming at him, is not the kid who is having the massive meltdown in class that gets the classroom evacuated. The gentle parented kid might have other issues if his parents don't figure out how to set limits, but the truth is that a parent willing to spend several minutes talking to their kid when they aren't doing what they've been told is demonstrating patience and emotional regulation, which is still better than screaming and yanking your kid around in terms of teaching them how to behave.

I know making fun of parents doing "gentle parenting" is a favorite pastime around these parts, but that's not what is leading to kids who throw chairs or scream at people in middle school.

Anonymous wrote:Parents don’t parent. DD 16 is a lifeguard and came home yesterday talking about a gentle parent trying to negotiate with her kid for several minutes to get out of the pool during break. Even teen DD could see it was a snowflake approach.

Anonymous wrote:I just finished year 25 in the classroom.

For argument's sake, let's say 3-5% of students are going to have serious behavioral problems, for whatever reason. I am not saying that those kids are bad, just that they are not able or not willing to function in a regular classroom without extreme behaviors. Those kids used to be suspended and over, sent to alternative programs, or put in full time special education classrooms, even at young ages. They didn't have a big effect on the rest of the kids, because they were rarely present.

Now we keep those kids in class because we want them in school. When they get dysregulated, we clear the room. We have extensive behavior plans. There are reward systems. The class essentially revolves around this child and his or her moods, for YEARS.

Let's say there's another 10% of kids who would have behavior issues, but ones that a teacher would typically be able to handle. Now they have an already-high level of disruption in the room, and in their judgment, the student with extreme behaviors doesn't seem to experience negative consequences. They escalate and feed off of each other.

The tone of the room is now completely different. You've got another, say, 20% in the room, who would be fine if the vibe of the room was fairly calm and predictable. Now they are following the lead of the instigators, or they are acting out from their own stress because this classroom is tense, chaotic, and unhappy.

We've gone from 10% of kids with mild misbehavior to now maybe 35%, many of whom now have seriously disruptive or extreme behaviors. The other kids are along for the ride, either trying to learn in the chaos, drifting along with their own needs unmet, even becoming literally traumatized by the physical violence occurring near them.

Admin tells the teacher to try forming relationships, make their lessons more engaging, etc. One training FCPS just put its teachers through said that we need to stop calling it misbehavior but instead "stress behavior," and instead of trying to stop it, figuring out what is stressing the child out and reduce the stressor. All responsibility is on the teacher.

This was all done with good intentions. It didn't work.

The kid we are keeping in class is still not learning, and now most of the other kids (many of whom also have trauma, disadvantaged backgrounds, and/or disabilities) aren't either.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see these behavioral issues from more than a handful of kids in my kid's school. Most kids are well behaved and clearly have parents who instill good manners, whether they are more strict and using time outs or similar, or use a more intensive modern approach of talking it through with kids. Either way the kids are all right.

The kids who struggle either have special needs or difficult home lives, or both. There have always been kids like this. But yes, schools used to separate them into another classroom or use suspensions to keep their behavior from impacting classrooms, and now they often do not. But I don't find those kids totally undermine the classroom. Most of the time it's fine. My kid has only been evacuated due to the violent behavior of a classmate one time.

I do question what middle and high school will be like. Bigger kids, bigger problems. But my kid's elementary experience has been very similar to mine in terms of behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

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. 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. 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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:I just finished year 25 in the classroom.

For argument's sake, let's say 3-5% of students are going to have serious behavioral problems, for whatever reason. I am not saying that those kids are bad, just that they are not able or not willing to function in a regular classroom without extreme behaviors. Those kids used to be suspended and over, sent to alternative programs, or put in full time special education classrooms, even at young ages. They didn't have a big effect on the rest of the kids, because they were rarely present.

Now we keep those kids in class because we want them in school. When they get dysregulated, we clear the room. We have extensive behavior plans. There are reward systems. The class essentially revolves around this child and his or her moods, for YEARS.

Let's say there's another 10% of kids who would have behavior issues, but ones that a teacher would typically be able to handle. Now they have an already-high level of disruption in the room, and in their judgment, the student with extreme behaviors doesn't seem to experience negative consequences. They escalate and feed off of each other.

The tone of the room is now completely different. You've got another, say, 20% in the room, who would be fine if the vibe of the room was fairly calm and predictable. Now they are following the lead of the instigators, or they are acting out from their own stress because this classroom is tense, chaotic, and unhappy.

We've gone from 10% of kids with mild misbehavior to now maybe 35%, many of whom now have seriously disruptive or extreme behaviors. The other kids are along for the ride, either trying to learn in the chaos, drifting along with their own needs unmet, even becoming literally traumatized by the physical violence occurring near them.

Admin tells the teacher to try forming relationships, make their lessons more engaging, etc. One training FCPS just put its teachers through said that we need to stop calling it misbehavior but instead "stress behavior," and instead of trying to stop it, figuring out what is stressing the child out and reduce the stressor. All responsibility is on the teacher.

This was all done with good intentions. It didn't work.

The kid we are keeping in class is still not learning, and now most of the other kids (many of whom also have trauma, disadvantaged backgrounds, and/or disabilities) aren't either.