fickman wrote:Here's a few steps to true reform:
SHORT TERM:
- Get the Federal government completely out of education.
- Replace national standardized uber-test with end-of-course exams to complete each class.
- Allow VOUCHERS! Parents who have school-aged children and choose NOT to use the public schools should be allowed to use their tax money to educate their children however they see fit - be it for private schools, charter schools, or homeschooling. (I have no problem with a state or local district taxing those without kids, with pre-school kids, or with kids who are out of high school. I can agree that the local communities benefit from an educated society. It's socialism, but our system allows for some of that at the local level.)
- Stop public-sector unions.
- At the state and local level, limit the percentage of administrative / overhead costs a district can carry. (Read: stop giving schools money that only go to increase the number of vice principals. This goes for colleges, too.)
- Fire bad teachers, pay good teachers. (Oh yeah, that means you have to measure their performance. Just like in any other job. And, "All I can do is teach, I can't make them learn" doesn't fly. . . I've heard that excuse for years in another occupation. It seems poor performing salespeople often come to the same conclusion: "What do they expect me to do? I can't make the customers buy anything." Oddly, the closers never worry about it.)
- Go back to separating the kids by skill level. Stop holding the advanced kids back with busy work while they wait for others to catch up. Let them know which group is which and inspire them to improve which group they're in through hard work. Stop protecting everybody's self esteem.
Of course, these reforms are all from an administrative and governance perspective. The other key piece is that we need to stop coddling bad parents and tell them their kids are out of control and who's fault that really is. . . but it's harder to legislate that.
LONG TERM:
Consider having a tiered high school system. Evaluate a kids' trajectory by late middle school / early high school and allow some kids to go into true vocational training instead of having them dabble in it while still staying on the college-bound plan. Stop telling every kid that they need a bachelor's degree to live. Many kids aren't college material and shouldn't be in a university. For the kids that do go to college, make sure they're learning something useful. . . at least if they want subsidized loans or public grants. Target subsidized loans and grants as financial incentives to stock our workforce with capable, productive workers instead of untrained, entitled slackers with a meaningless sheet of paper.
If we can do all of these things, I think we'd really be set to excel. (I'm not holding my breath.)
The only caveat is that if you seperate based on skill (which I agree with) don't just put the good teachers with the advanced kids, the average and below average kids should get a shot at good teachers too.
This is anecdotal, but it is what drives my belief here. When I was in high school (a few decades ago), I was in the advanced class for Algebra I. We had a fantastic teacher and the class was a breeze. My Sophmore year, I couldn't take advanced Algebra II and play football because of the class schedule so I took average Algebra II. We had a teacher that didn't teach and didn't care. I learned most of that class on my own outside of the classroom and the class turned out to be more challenging than taking a more advanced class with a good teacher.
Kids who are already at a disadvantage because of their current skill level should not be further disadvantaged by putting the sorry teachers with the students hwo are a little behind.