Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is very sad to read. I am recalling my son’s classmates (private) last year during mystery reader sessions. Their eager faces attentive, hanging onto every word I read aloud, some of them knowing the book practically by heart from having read it at home so many times. Why should some kids have an upbringing like this and others like what you described? It’s unfair and heartbreaking and schools are exacerbating it further.

You’re, right, it is very sad. Even if my kids’ parents could take a day off work, many of them are not literate and couldn’t be a mystery reader. The class differences in education, even in public schools, are astonishing. Education is not the great equalizer.

Teacher of low income immigrant ESOL students here. The students who do the best in school don’t have parents who come in to volunteer. It’s nice but it’s fluff. The students who excel have parents that back up what’s going on in school. They answer phone calls and Dojo messages. They make sure their kid is at school on time every day. It’s the basics that make the difference. Our district offers so many free opportunities for kids. It’s up to the parents to take advantage of them.

While this is true, it doesn't help the kids whose parents don't support their kids in this way, whatever the reason. I see it with many of my kid's classmates who I have known for years -- bright, curious kids interested in school become surly and disinterested by 2nd or 3rd grade because their parents just clearly do not value education and may not even value their kids. The school can only do so much, but these kids are screwed because their parents are unwilling to do the rest.

Anonymous wrote:Homeschool kids will be doing circles around public school kids when applying to colleges in 5-10 years.

I’d agree with you, but I don’t think college admissions work the way they used to.

Homeschool kids will be doing circles around public school kids when applying to colleges in 5-10 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack your kid’s lunch, limit screen time and don’t allow a phone at a young age. Why should this be the school’s problem?

A choice in the matter should be the norm for parents rather than constant forced screen usage in school settings.

Some children don’t have the luxury of packed lunch.

NP: Even when I was unemployed and on food stamps I packed my DD's lunch. I ate an apple for breakfast and skipped lunch to provide her lunch because it was that important to me.

And what if you couldn't even afford that (the apple for breakfast and the dinner?) Not everyone has the luxury of food stamps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack your kid’s lunch, limit screen time and don’t allow a phone at a young age. Why should this be the school’s problem?

A choice in the matter should be the norm for parents rather than constant forced screen usage in school settings.

Some children don’t have the luxury of packed lunch.

NP: Even when I was unemployed and on food stamps I packed my DD's lunch. I ate an apple for breakfast and skipped lunch to provide her lunch because it was that important to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of my pet peeves is people always wondering why we can't have nice things like Europeans. Many of those nice things happen because of higher tax rates because they have social democracies, not all out capitalism.

And as for Japan, maybe they are more capitalist, but they are having a huge demographic issue because people don't even want to have kids.

I agree that we need structural reform, but it does not come free. You get what you pay for and we don't pay/tax/invest enough to make that happen.

Oh please. There is plenty of existing tax revenue that could be re-allocated to education. And plenty in the school budget that could be re-allocated to *real* education

PP. Then why isn't it happening? At what point in the budgeting process does the bureaucrat say that something else is more important than education. And money doesn't come out of thin air. How do you know that there is plenty of existing tax revenue? What have you identified that should be cut, without shortchanging other organizations within the county or state?

We already spend more per student than any other country. Including countries in Europe. The problem with America is that our school systems (and other government departments) are so full of bloat and waste that we have nothing to show for all that extra money. Just look at some of the salaries reported on this website. In what world should government workers be earning multiple six figures? Yet here we are, and our kids eat crap all day at school and have to suffer through the damaging “balanced literacy” reading and whatever new “social emotional learning” program (which used to just be called normal parenting) because parents in this country don’t want to parent and administrators want to line the own pockets rather than put the money in the right places.

Anonymous wrote:

This is very sad to read. I am recalling my son’s classmates (private) last year during mystery reader sessions. Their eager faces attentive, hanging onto every word I read aloud, some of them knowing the book practically by heart from having read it at home so many times. Why should some kids have an upbringing like this and others like what you described? It’s unfair and heartbreaking and schools are exacerbating it further.

You’re, right, it is very sad. Even if my kids’ parents could take a day off work, many of them are not literate and couldn’t be a mystery reader. The class differences in education, even in public schools, are astonishing. Education is not the great equalizer.

Teacher of low income immigrant ESOL students here. The students who do the best in school don’t have parents who come in to volunteer. It’s nice but it’s fluff. The students who excel have parents that back up what’s going on in school. They answer phone calls and Dojo messages. They make sure their kid is at school on time every day. It’s the basics that make the difference. Our district offers so many free opportunities for kids. It’s up to the parents to take advantage of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of my pet peeves is people always wondering why we can't have nice things like Europeans. Many of those nice things happen because of higher tax rates because they have social democracies, not all out capitalism.

And as for Japan, maybe they are more capitalist, but they are having a huge demographic issue because people don't even want to have kids.

I agree that we need structural reform, but it does not come free. You get what you pay for and we don't pay/tax/invest enough to make that happen.

Oh please. There is plenty of existing tax revenue that could be re-allocated to education. And plenty in the school budget that could be re-allocated to *real* education

PP. Then why isn't it happening? At what point in the budgeting process does the bureaucrat say that something else is more important than education. And money doesn't come out of thin air. How do you know that there is plenty of existing tax revenue? What have you identified that should be cut, without shortchanging other organizations within the county or state?

This is very sad to read. I am recalling my son’s classmates (private) last year during mystery reader sessions. Their eager faces attentive, hanging onto every word I read aloud, some of them knowing the book practically by heart from having read it at home so many times. Why should some kids have an upbringing like this and others like what you described? It’s unfair and heartbreaking and schools are exacerbating it further.

You’re, right, it is very sad. Even if my kids’ parents could take a day off work, many of them are not literate and couldn’t be a mystery reader. The class differences in education, even in public schools, are astonishing. Education is not the great equalizer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many parents actually think the current amount of screen time in schools is a good idea? How many parents will actually challenge this for their child vs accepting this as the new “normal” when there’s really nothing normal about it? How many question the food choices and find ways to challenge processed junk being offered at each meal? I’ve worked at schools that had better food options but it was because of parent push back.

Most parents though don’t push back against changes as much as they should, they would rather say that’s just how it is now than take charge over their child’s education. If you are accepting of it without question then you’re part of the problem. Teachers know it’s not working, it’s part of the reason teachers are quitting in droves, but until the parents step up the madness will continue.

Guilty. I hate the amount of screen time and junk food in public school, but instead of pushing back I opted out and decided to send my children to a $45k private. Would rather spend the money than waste time trying to campaign against things that are being heavily promoted by $$$ lobbying (food companies, tech companies)

Even in $$$ private school, my kids regularly get served processed food and junk food for snacks, birthdays, and other special occasions (think donuts, candy, cupcakes at like 10am). We balance that against healthy eating at home and sending in healthy lunches. But, the problem is widespread.

Ours too, but it is much less frequent. Maybe 25-30 days total. Birthdays and special holidays/class parties. And it’s never candy, they don’t allow candy. I don’t mind donuts or cupcakes from a good bakery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many parents actually think the current amount of screen time in schools is a good idea? How many parents will actually challenge this for their child vs accepting this as the new “normal” when there’s really nothing normal about it? How many question the food choices and find ways to challenge processed junk being offered at each meal? I’ve worked at schools that had better food options but it was because of parent push back.

Most parents though don’t push back against changes as much as they should, they would rather say that’s just how it is now than take charge over their child’s education. If you are accepting of it without question then you’re part of the problem. Teachers know it’s not working, it’s part of the reason teachers are quitting in droves, but until the parents step up the madness will continue.

Guilty. I hate the amount of screen time and junk food in public school, but instead of pushing back I opted out and decided to send my children to a $45k private. Would rather spend the money than waste time trying to campaign against things that are being heavily promoted by $$$ lobbying (food companies, tech companies)

Even in $$$ private school, my kids regularly get served processed food and junk food for snacks, birthdays, and other special occasions (think donuts, candy, cupcakes at like 10am). We balance that against healthy eating at home and sending in healthy lunches. But, the problem is widespread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, I do not want my kid to be able to access any food at school that I didn’t send in lunch money for, unless school lunches start looking like Finland’s.

That means I don’t want my kid to be able to go up to the school lunch line and say “I forgot my lunch money,” and then be handed some junk without my knowledge.

Oh well. Bummer for you.

Well no, I moved my kid to private where they don’t serve garbage.

Or you could have just made their food yourself and told your kid not to get junk from the lunch line. I can count on one hand the amount of times my kids have eaten anything from the school cafeteria--they have zero interest in it.

That’s fine on an individual level but it doesn’t help anyone else. Kids who can’t afford lunch or whose parents can’t send it should not have to eat unhealthy crap every day.

+1, and it doesn't address the issue of schools just being awash in junk food, well beyond the cafeteria offerings. When the school has no policy on junk food, and when a lot of teachers use candy and junk food as rewards, it wouldn't matter if the kids were being served Michelin starred vegan health food at lunch, the kids are learning all kinds of unhealthy things about food.

That's the issue. It's not about money. It's about the fact that a lot of people in education think there should be no limits on screens or the kinds of foods kids are given. They want to be able to default to the easiest possible option when it suits them.

Having rules like "no tablets/phones" and "no food rewards" and "no candy/junk except on designated days (Halloween, last day of term, whatever you want the exceptions to be" teach kids about moderation and limits. Public schools don't have to become Montessori or Waldorf schools where none of this stuff is allowed -- if people want that they can pay for Montessori or Waldorf. But that doesn't mean that public schools should just abandon their responsibility to help kids learn that excess screen time and high-calorie, high-sugar, highly process junk foods are really bad for their health.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, I do not want my kid to be able to access any food at school that I didn’t send in lunch money for, unless school lunches start looking like Finland’s.

That means I don’t want my kid to be able to go up to the school lunch line and say “I forgot my lunch money,” and then be handed some junk without my knowledge.

Oh well. Bummer for you.

Well no, I moved my kid to private where they don’t serve garbage.

Or you could have just made their food yourself and told your kid not to get junk from the lunch line. I can count on one hand the amount of times my kids have eaten anything from the school cafeteria--they have zero interest in it.

That’s fine on an individual level but it doesn’t help anyone else. Kids who can’t afford lunch or whose parents can’t send it should not have to eat unhealthy crap every day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure people outside your bubble really feel as strongly about this as you do.

I have no issue with screen time. Children need to be technically capable. I spend my entire work day staring at a screen. This is how professional jobs are structured. I want the schools teaching my kid how to use technology - including learning on screens.

I also don’t understand the outrage over occasional snacks for celebration. DC had a parent once that organized a “garden” party where the students celebrated an event with carrots and celery. The students thought it sucked - because it does suck. Your household rules of no sugar ever do not match most the nation. It’s not really fair to the other students to have your views pushed upon them.

Yes I know most people don’t share my views, and that is why we are in the current state of affairs!

I have commonly heard this belief spouted that “lots of computer games in school —> future Gates or Zuckerberg” but it is not true!! Those of us who are successful in STEM will tell you that there is no correlation, or more likely a negative correlation, between heavy use of screens and development of one’s observation, inference, and spatial awareness skills.

We actually host occasional afternoon “garden” parties for our ES-aged neighborhood friends with active backyard games. Snacks are limited to carrot sticks/hummus, fruit salad, and water. They demolish everything - hunger is the best sauce! I also do not mind sugar as a treat. About 2-3 times a month my kids get cupcakes or cookies in school to celebrate a classmate’s birthday or holiday party. I would not like if it were 2-3 times a week or day, especially if the treats had all sorts of unexplainable ingredients.

I’m all for bringing back cursive instruction. And the scientific evidence supports it. But I’m generally alone in that view.

if it makes you feel better, you are not alone

we may still be GENERALLY alone

sigh

the gamification of everything drives me absolutely f'ing nuts - this absurd low-IQ idea that nothing with substance can be interesting unless you tart it up with flashing lights and sugar - kids are naturally curious and trainable and if you train them to wait for the treat they will wait for the treat - if you train them to just eat the veggies and read the books they will eat the veggies and read the books

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be blunt, I do not want my kid to be able to access any food at school that I didn’t send in lunch money for, unless school lunches start looking like Finland’s.

That means I don’t want my kid to be able to go up to the school lunch line and say “I forgot my lunch money,” and then be handed some junk without my knowledge.

Oh well. Bummer for you.

Well no, I moved my kid to private where they don’t serve garbage.

Or you could have just made their food yourself and told your kid not to get junk from the lunch line. I can count on one hand the amount of times my kids have eaten anything from the school cafeteria--they have zero interest in it.