My wife has been teaching for over 23yrs and I know how much work is involved in being a good teacher.
This type of system is comming to EVERY State!!
No way I could do her job.
There is no one to blame for this (and the other problems we face) but OURSELVES. As long as WE sit on our A%$#$ and let it happen it will continue!!
Stressor wrote: Sort of makes me wonder why turning 15 years old seems to make them too dumb to succeed in school. Maybe we are doing it wrong.
I think 9th grade is the worst school year for students. Their hormone flow is in inverse proportion to their brain activity--some kids handle it better than others but it's truly a difficult time for all.
If your school district engages in nonsense like this, think of Eddie Murphy's standup routine on haunted houses.
In the horror movies, the family moves in, the walls bleed, the kid is sucked into the TV, and they don't leave!
Get involved, but schools don't change overnight. If you have older kids, the schools won't be fixed in time for your kids. GET OUT! Send your kids to private school or move to a school district that isn't run by idiots.
* This post was
edited 08/18/08 08:13pm by 69RoadRunner *
The bottom line is, even under these "guidelines", teachers can still teach. They are just not allowed to assign failing grades. The only people this really hurts are those it was meant to protect (the failing kids), and even then, at least they get multiple chances to get their act together.
quote:
Special Education becomes more complicated when you add SED (Socially Emotionally Disturbed) to the mix, some of which are accompanied by a “wrap around” (an adult paid to follow this kid and wrap their arms around the student to contain them when they go berserk). The demands on the school system far exceed the schools’ ability to satisfy them.
I drive a "special need" bus. I reported to my supervisor that the only "special need" some of these have is to have their butts whipped.
Once I drove some of them in to the bus yard and had him come out to meet them. I heard one Dallas area principle on the news say that if the parents do not teach their kids to respect them, they won't respect anyone else. It has to begin at home.
All Great posts here but missing an important bit of info! I believe it was in the comic strip "Pogo" some years back and the quote is "we have met the enemy and he is us."/
We are the people who elect the officials that make the rules. Incumbents overwhelmingly rule. We must love mediocracy, graft and paying politicians to say what we want to hear vs what we need to hear.
We are the parents who say "my child didn't do that" to the teachers and administrators.
We are the society that blames the system when our child is "caught" and we can't deny it.
We are the country that supports the most law suits in the world.
We are the country that looks for our Uncle (Sam) to take care of us no matter what stupid decisions we make.
We are the we...we..we...country now aren't we?
Sorry for my part in the fiasco we are in at the moment.
Greg
Chef/Pilot
DW/Navigator
Kids too old to go, no G-kids yet
2006 Expedition
2007 Niagra
Doug4.7 wrote: These sort of rules really would not change the way I would teach a class. So what if I don't get to fail a failing student. The good ones will still be good, and the bad ones will still be bad (despite their "good grades"). There will still be a grade distribution, it just won't be as great as it "normally" would be. All these sort of rules mean is that a teacher can no longer have the "joy" of failing a student.
This not quite true. It is pretty clear that the good students may Not still be good. They see the underachieving students getting acceptable, if not great, grades and wonder why they are busting their humps working for something that is not all that much better than those that do nothing. You work hard, sacrifice some weekend time doing projects, stay up late studying for tests and end up with a 3.5, while the other kid parties, doesn't turn in a project, and never spends a minute studying but gets a 3.0 because a "C" would damage his psyche. Being "average" is such a stigma! The real kicker comes at college time, when, because of need, ethnic quotas, or legacy status, the non-achiever gets the aid and the spot leaving the other kid looking for another school. That the non-achiever will flunk out the first year, wasting the spot, is lost to all except the hard working kid. Giving the kid a failing grade or at least a "D" showing below average work would send a message to colleges and employers that there was trouble looming.
Both retired. 1 year until son finishes college, then financial freedom! We lost Max, the Schnoodle after 16 wonderful years but now enjoy Nicklaus Von Schnoodle (Nicky), who is a full time job. Our new Allegro Bay 34 XB is wonderful.
SteveRuff wrote: This not quite true. It is pretty clear that the good students may Not still be good. They see the underachieving students getting acceptable, if not great, grades and wonder why they are busting their humps working for something that is not all that much better than those that do nothing. You work hard, sacrifice some weekend time doing projects, stay up late studying for tests and end up with a 3.5, while the other kid parties, doesn't turn in a project, and never spends a minute studying but gets a 3.0 because a "C" would damage his psyche. Being "average" is such a stigma! The real kicker comes at college time, when, because of need, ethnic quotas, or legacy status, the non-achiever gets the aid and the spot leaving the other kid looking for another school. That the non-achiever will flunk out the first year, wasting the spot, is lost to all except the hard working kid. Giving the kid a failing grade or at least a "D" showing below average work would send a message to colleges and employers that there was trouble looming.
I see it differently. The person who gets the 3.5 busting his/her butt stays in college while the slacker drops out. The busting their butt person goes on to lead a productive life, no matter how much the slacker was coddled.
Besides, there was nothing in the OP that said the teacher had to give the slacker a "B" (3.0), just that the teacher could not give an "F" (0.0). So the slacker would get a 1.5 GPA (D's & C's), not a 3.0 (that is "B" work). That low GPA would pretty much rule out any college the 3.5 student would want to go to (unless the 1.5 can play ball). So I say the new system would not hurt the good students.
Offline
.jpg)
