Education: Rewards for parents?

[sachmo71]

I've heard a number of stories in the news about schools where teachers are getting caught organizing cheating for their classes on standardized tests, but it seems like the natural result of their employment and compenstation being tied to the results of said standarized tests. While it seems like a decent solution to improving the sad state of our educational system, it puts much of the blame on the educator.

But where in the equation is there any responsibility on the parent to ensure that their child is doing the required work outside of the classroom? I know there are laws requiring parents to educate their children in some way, but I'm not 100% convinced that children will be able to master educational concepts without effort from the parents as well.

So this led me to another line of thinking...rather than more punishments for indequate work, what if parents were given a small ($100) tax refund if their children were proven to have mastered the concepts of their particular grade? I'd be curious to see how giving the parents an incentive to sit down with their children and help in the education process would affect the system as a whole.

I know there are holes in this idea, so please tell me why this would never work.

[johnnyshaka]

Can you imagine the pressure on a teacher to not send home an unsatisfactory result?

It's hard enough as it is to tell a parent that little Johnny is dumber than dirt and now you are going to be, essentially, taking money out of their pockets, too.

[rkmsuf]

100 bucks isn't going to change a parent normally unwilling to put effort into educating their children.

[JonInMiddleGA]

$100/time involved = < minimum wage

[Young Drachma]

High stakes testing doesn't help anyone but bureaucrats and public schools in many areas are so fundamentally flawed that no amount of "giveaways" are going to improve things. Giving parents ownership in a kids education is the only way to truly level the playing field.

[molson]

Any parent that spends time on his kid's education only for $100 would probablybeat the kid up if he "costs" the parent the money by not making the great.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

High stakes testing doesn't help anyone but bureaucrats

Yes, Lord knows we don't want any sort of accountability.

[Mustang]

You know what my incentive will be to make sure that my kids are properly educated?

That they are not sitting on MY couch eating cheetos watching cartoons on MY TV when they are 28.

I'll be 64 at that time so, I want that to be MY job.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Yes, Lord knows we don't want any sort of accountability.

It doesn't give accountability. It's all fine and dandy if you want high stakes testing, but the way the schools are setup now, all it does is have schools rigging the system.

Ideally, these tests are intended to measure student learning based on lessons and such alike through the course of the year. That's how tests were when I was in school and while there was a "big deal" made of them, it wasn't as it is now where the focus is based SOLELY on the test and LESS on the education. Teachers were given leeway to teach how they wanted and to innovate in their classrooms.

I think that while there ought to be guidelines and standards, that educators in the classroom should have the ability to spend an entire year keeping kids -- and themselves -- engaged by being able and encouraged to think outside of the box if they choose to.

But perhaps, nanny state knows best.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

It doesn't give accountability. It's all fine and dandy if you want high stakes testing, but the way the schools are setup now, all it does is have schools rigging the system.

Ideally, these tests are intended to measure student learning based on lessons and such alike through the course of the year. That's how tests were when I was in school and while there was a "big deal" made of them, it wasn't as it is now where the focus is based SOLELY on the test and LESS on the education. Teachers were given leeway to teach how they wanted and to innovate in their classrooms.

I think that while there ought to be guidelines and standards, that educators in the classroom should have the ability to spend an entire year keeping kids -- and themselves -- engaged by being able and encouraged to think outside of the box if they choose to.

But perhaps, nanny state knows best.

Right and then the focus becomes "how to take the test" rather than how to apply knowledge. This system would totally miss the boat and a lot of what education is about.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

$100/time involved = < minimum wage

Then make it a better credit.

I thought about the pressure from parents on the teacher about the grades, but if you're talking about a standardized test, it's really not up to the teacher...it's the school system. They either made it or not. If the teacher and parent are in a true partnership, the child should easily master the basics.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Right and then the focus becomes "how to take the test" rather than how to apply knowledge. This system would totally miss the boat and a lot of what education is about.

But this is what is happening now in Texas. The teachers spent a lot of time preparing kids to take the test. Or teaching the kids how to cheat in some cases.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

But this is what is happening now in Texas. The teachers spent a lot of time preparing kids to take the test. Or teaching the kids how to cheat in some cases.

So you want to now pay them?

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

So you want to now pay them?

Pay the parents? Yes, if their kids are doing well in school.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

But this is what is happening now in Texas. The teachers spent a lot of time preparing kids to take the test. Or teaching the kids how to cheat in some cases.

+1

And all across America. The schools are focused on the PR game of making themselves look good, versus the means of educating ordinary kids. They trumpet the few who do great, the great school districts trumpet their ability to teach everybody and hope no one checks back later to see where the kids go after they graduate.

If the goal is to provide students with the tools necessary to succeed as functional members of society, that's one thing. If the goal is to save as many kids as we can, by exposing them to lots of new things that will possibly spark interest and motivate them to do more than just tread water, that's something else.

If the goal is just to make bureaucrats and tax-loathing citizens 'feel' better about schools working, without any regard for whether that's true or not..then we should just keep going the way we are right now.

I don't want to pay anybody, besides maybe the teachers. Paying parents for their kids being in school and doing well is a little crazy. As if there isn't enough pressure on kids to achieve, that'll be just an added and well-intentioned, but flawed, method of trying achieve what we ought to be working to achieve anyway.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

But this is what is happening now in Texas. The teachers spent a lot of time preparing kids to take the test. Or teaching the kids how to cheat in some cases.

We do that here for like 2 weeks they take the test and that's it. There's very little politicing or controversy surrounding the thing.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

... wasn't as it is now where the focus is based SOLELY on the test and LESS on the education.

One of the biggest shortcomings I see in what is still the best thing to happen to taxpayer funded education in my lifetime is that there's not yet enough connection between the tests,the material actually being taught, and the official standard curriculum. And that's a breakdown at the state level first, the local level next (as between them they have control over all three components).

It's not perfect (and may not ever be) but the focus should be on improving that correlation, not stripping away the primary accountability that the schools / taxpayer employees have.

edit to add: And make no mistake, I'm not suggesting for a minute that I believe that even a perfect implementation (and subsequent improvements) to NCBLA will actually fix all that's wrong with our dismal public education system. I'm convinced that it's actually to broken to ever be truly "repaired" and certainly not without a complete overhaul far beyond what the masses would ever accept. All any of this is going to do is add at least a little accountability for the money that's taken at gunpoint from the taxpayers and hopefully make at least some improvement to the actual education in the process.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

We do that here for like 2 weeks they take the test and that's it. There's very little politicing or controversy surrounding the thing.

Im curious as to how your school district is ranked? The problems with cheating by the teachers is more rampant in school districts with poor test scores, which usually correlates to the poorer districts.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Im curious as to how your school district is ranked? The problems with cheating by the teachers is more rampant in school districts with poor test scores, which usually correlates to the poorer districts.

It's ranked fairly well.

IMO, paying parents to well... parent, is a lousy road to go down.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

One of the biggest shortcomings I see in what is still the best thing to happen to taxpayer funded education in my lifetime is that there's not yet enough connection between the tests,the material actually being taught, and the official standard curriculum. And that's a breakdown at the state level first, the local level next (as between them they have control over all three components).

It's not perfect (and may not ever be) but the focus should be on improving that correlation, not stripping away the primary accountability that the schools / taxpayer employees have.

edit to add: And make no mistake, I'm not suggesting for a minute that I believe that even a perfect implementation (and subsequent improvements) to NCBLA will actually fix all that's wrong with our dismal public education system. I'm convinced that it's actually to broken to ever be truly "repaired" and certainly not without a complete overhaul far beyond what the masses would ever accept. All any of this is going to do is add at least a little accountability for the money that's taken at gunpoint from the taxpayers and hopefully make at least some improvement to the actual education in the process.

I get your sentiment. I'm convinced that it makes a broken system worse, rather than better. I don't have much confidence in so-called "education leaders" to do anything right. Bureaucrats work in their own self interest, especially if their kids don't go to the schools they work in and they don't live in the communities that the schools are in.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

It's ranked fairly well.

IMO, paying parents to well... parent, is a lousy road to go down.

It just doesn't seem fair to me to hold the teachers 100% accountable if students aren't learning, especially in the primary grades. yes, it is their jobs, but it's so much harder to teach if the parents aren't involved in the process.

It may seem like basic parenting to those who were raised that way, but in the houses where it's really needed it may not be considered a part of parenting. Those are the parents that I think need to be motivated to help.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

$100/time involved = < minimum wage

i don't think i've ever seen a less than or equal sign used on the internet

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

It just doesn't seem fair to me to hold the teachers 100% accountable if students aren't learning, especially in the primary grades. yes, it is their jobs, but it's so much harder to teach if the parents aren't involved in the process.

It may seem like basic parenting to those who were raised that way, but in the houses where it's really needed it may not be considered a part of parenting. Those are the parents that I think need to be motivated to help.

I would submit monitary motivation sends a horrible message all around. What a terrible lesson for kids. Mom and dad only give a shit because their pockets get lined.

If the motivation of wanting their kids to succeed isn't enough anything else is just a waste of time in terms of making people care.

Maybe that's too idealistic, dunno.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

i don't think i've ever seen a less than or equal sign used on the internet

Really? I use it pretty frequently, especially lately it seems.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I would submit monitary motivation sends a horrible message all around. What a terrible lesson for kids. Mom and dad only give a shit because their pockets get lined.

If the motivation of wanting their kids to succeed isn't enough anything else is just a waste of time in terms of making people care.

Maybe that's too idealistic, dunno.

I don't know if it's idealistic, and I don't really know if these parents aren't helping out. It just seems like something that might be tried to see if it makes a difference.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

One of the biggest shortcomings I see in what is still the best thing to happen to taxpayer funded education in my lifetime is that there's not yet enough connection between the tests,the material actually being taught, and the official standard curriculum. And that's a breakdown at the state level first, the local level next (as between them they have control over all three components).

It's not perfect (and may not ever be) but the focus should be on improving that correlation, not stripping away the primary accountability that the schools / taxpayer employees have.

edit to add: And make no mistake, I'm not suggesting for a minute that I believe that even a perfect implementation (and subsequent improvements) to NCBLA will actually fix all that's wrong with our dismal public education system. I'm convinced that it's actually to broken to ever be truly "repaired" and certainly not without a complete overhaul far beyond what the masses would ever accept. All any of this is going to do is add at least a little accountability for the money that's taken at gunpoint from the taxpayers and hopefully make at least some improvement to the actual education in the process.

Please let me know if I'm reading this incorrectly, but it seems you're in support of NCLB? Doesn't that smack in the face of what I perceive to be your conservative, state's rights leanings?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Please let me know if I'm reading this incorrectly, but it seems you're in support of NCLB? Doesn't that smack in the face of what I perceive to be your conservative, state's rights leanings?

State's rights, in practice, died a very long time ago. I don't operate under any illusions about that, nor about the possibility of them returning without anything short of a full blown revolution.

I'm actually more pragmatic than I think people realize.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Really? I use it pretty frequently, especially lately it seems.

Yeah -- it's usually used when people are arguing a point completely in favor of one side. I rarely see people want to argue that one side might be less than the other, or the sides might be equal.

[wade moore]

I have thought about starting a thread about what this has turned to several times.

My fiance is a kindergarten teacher and we often talk about accountability for teachers. I have some ideas about it (that broadly actually line up with JiMGA a fair amount) where she often argues the point of what will realistically happen in a school system.

I don't know what the answer is - but there HAS to be more accountability in the schools. The problem is to do it "right" it would take money and a change in the mindset of most administrative offices of school districts which will be VERY difficult to do.

I don't know what the answer is, but I'm with JiMGA that something has to be done. There are some VERY good teachers out there and some VERY bad ones, yet they get the same pay, same evals, etc, etc.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

State's rights, in practice, died a very long time ago. I don't operate under any illusions about that, nor about the possibility of them returning without anything short of a full blown revolution.

I'm actually more pragmatic than I think people realize.

Fair enough.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I have thought about starting a thread about what this has turned to several times.

My fiance is a kindergarten teacher and we often talk about accountability for teachers. I have some ideas about it (that broadly actually line up with JiMGA a fair amount) where she often argues the point of what will realistically happen in a school system.

I don't know what the answer is - but there HAS to be more accountability in the schools. The problem is to do it "right" it would take money and a change in the mindset of most administrative offices of school districts which will be VERY difficult to do.

I don't know what the answer is, but I'm with JiMGA that something has to be done. There are some VERY good teachers out there and some VERY bad ones, yet they get the same pay, same evals, etc, etc.

And in a melodrama stereotype kinda way it can be reversed: Good teachers that go outside of the curriculum to do something worthwhile are reprimanded while teachers that do a lackluster job while staying inside the lines are rewarded.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

And in a melodrama stereotype kinda way it can be reversed: Good teachers that go outside of the curriculum to do something worthwhile are reprimanded while teachers that do a lackluster job while staying inside the lines are rewarded.

True, although fortunately not true so far in her career. She is fortunate to have a long-time principal near the end of retirement that understands the value of such things.

Who knows once he retires. But, I have certainly heard the stories for other teachers.

[AENeuman]

The first chapter in the book Freakonomics is on teachers cheating on tests for their students and sumo wrestlers. I have my econ class read it. Perfect example of incentives and ethics.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by rowech

I'm a high school math teacher in my 10th year (above average wealth district) and it's funny that this thread is here because this year, more than ever, I'm strongly thinking about finding a different job.

My fiance has had the same thoughts for the same reasons - which is sad because if you know her you'd realize that she's made to be a teacher and I can't see her doing anything else.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by wade moore

My fiance has had the same thoughts for the same reasons - which is sad because if you know her you'd realize that she's made to be a teacher and I can't see her doing anything else.

When you tell me she is thinking about more schooling I just don't get it. I'm thinking, "How does a Ph.D. help her teach Kindergarten? That's what she's going to keep doing, right?"

[chesapeake]

Rowech, I agree with most of what you say. From talking to many folks on NCLB (including dozens of teachers) it seems the problems distill down to two big things. First, the law is too punitive. It is basically a bundle of sticks made to whack schools, districts and states into meeting somewhat arbitrary goals. That is why you are seeing people and institutions cheat. Fear of failure is an intense motivator. The law needs teeth, but as many as it has is proving counterproductive.

Funding is the other, although it is not exclusive to NCLB. The requirements added by the bill did come without sufficient funds for states to implement them successfully and that is a problem which should be fixed. But our whole system of funding education is pathetic and leads to inconsistency from year-to-year depending on economic cycles and great disparity between rich and poor areas.

[Cringer]

I thought Ron Paul was for this for home schoolers, but double checking I see he is just for a general tax break for everyone sending a kid to any kind of school, and for giving teachers a break.....

To help parents with the costs of schooling, I have introduced H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, in Congress. This bill would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 (adjustable after 2007 for inflation) per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.

Another bill I have sponsored, H.R. 1059, allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit, thus easing their financial burden and encouraging good teachers to stay in an underpaid profession.

As for my opinion, I think parents who send their kids to local schools can bite me if they want any more of a break just because they help with their child do their home work. I am biased though, I home school my daughter because I have no faith in the Texas school system and their only real goal of teaching for good scores on the state tests.

I pay taxes that go to local schools. I then pay for everything my daughter needs to get an education at home. I hold my daughters education in my hands. If anyone should get a tax break it is people who home school, and maybe people who send kids to private schools as well.

Just my two cents.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

The law needs teeth, but as many as it has is proving counterproductive.

{blinks}
{blinks again}

Huh?

One of the biggest problems I've seen so far is that the teeth is manages to have are barely bared, much less used. And I'm sitting here in one of the worst of the worst when it comes to public education, so it isn't as though there aren't plenty of candidates for it. Given how little the actual strong provisions of the act have been implemented here (and how easily the systems are able to minimize the ones that are) I'm really quite surprised that it's drawn much more than a ripple of attention in states that are better off overall.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

We do that here for like 2 weeks they take the test and that's it. There's very little politicing or controversy surrounding the thing.

Do you still live in Massachusetts? I know the Globe will only pick up on it when the tests are being applied or the scores are announced, but there is a lot of grumbling about it, and that's coming from one of the best, richest districts (Concord-Carlisle) that doesn't need to change anything to get up there.

Originally Posted by rowech

1. Many teachers do not have problems with testing. However, testing every year is too much. Personally, I'd like a 4th grade, 8th grade, and 12th grade test with real consequences at the 8th grade level...meaning if you don't pass, you don't go to high school. We have too many kids who have no business being in high school other than it's the age they fit best. You then have few students holding many back no matter how much you track them.

3. Education is in need of such a major overhaul but nobody wants to do it. You can't fund education without money and quite simply, many people don't want to pay for it. When you set systems up where parents/citizens/etc. have to vote to increase their own taxes to raise money, something is wrong. It might not be that way in your states, but that's generally how it works in Ohio. In addition, the time for mandatory high school has come and gone. Quite frankly, we're wasting a lot of time with a lot of kids who would be better served by going to more directed professional schools teaching them things they will need for chosen jobs. High school would then become a training ground for college.

4. Nobody listens to the teachers. Parents say what they think should be done. Lawmakers say what they think should be done. Administrators say what they think should be done. They all put their heads together and teachers get shutout. I think people would really be surprised what would happen if teachers were a) put in the position of dictating what happens, b) allowed to actually discipline students by removing them from class, and c) supported in their dealings with students and parents.

5. Pay more to attract people who know the subject matter. We have way too many teachers, especially in math and science at the elementary levels who simply have no focus on these subjects. They do a piss poor job because they don't get the subjects themselves and lay terrible foundations for our students in doing higher level material at later grades.

The current system is setup to do exactly what it's doing. Teach to the test, show off your fancy scores, try to use this to make enough money to keep things going. Cheating is a byproduct in poor districts because of the need for money and the need to avoid state takeover. The system in most states is broken but everybody keeps trying to plug holes instead of getting a new bucket.

I strongly agree that social promotion is killing schools. There are students that want to learn, and students who don't. There are students who are capable at one level, and students who are at others. Yet the system is desperate to treat them all the same. I also agree with teachers being given more leeway, but on the flip side I was a smart kid growing up who starting in elementary school would be getting sent to the principal's office everyday because I would finish my work early then get bored and start doing other things. If teachers want more control, they need to be smarter about how they exercise it. Whether it's tenure or whatever, way too many teachers are out of their element and either don't understand the material they're supposed to teach or can't handle a classroom of students.

I'm confused by your idea that voters shouldn't have control over raising money. Are you trying to say more should come from the state or federal gov't - because that's still the voters? At least under this system, certain (rich) districts like Concord can decide they'll fund education, and more parents who want better education for their kids will move there. It's not an ideal school choice program, but in practice it works that way.

(And to be fair to your students, if you're stuck teaching geometric proofs, those are gay. )

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Do you still live in Massachusetts? I know the Globe will only pick up on it when the tests are being applied or the scores are announced, but there is a lot of grumbling about it, and that's coming from one of the best, richest districts (Concord-Carlisle) that doesn't need to change anything to get up there.

NH

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

One of the biggest problems I've seen so far is that the teeth is manages to have are barely bared, much less used.

The teeth haven't kicked in yet. Developing a testing regime from scratch and revamping curriculum to meet the requirements took time. Especially considering that only a modest fraction of the promised federal funding to meet the new federal requirements materialized. At this snapshot in time, almost all states are in compliance with these new federal regulations and testing has been underway for long enough to start determining success.

The teeth are pretty nasty, and include cutting funding for a school, firing teachers & firing administrative staff. The problem, however, isn't so much the teeth as when they bite. The way the law defines failure will cause even very good schools to be conisdered as failing for reasons as arbitrary as an influx of developmentally disabled kids or kids that may speak very little English.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

... and include cutting funding for a school, firing teachers & firing administrative staff.

All of which are long overdue AFAIC.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by rowech

Education has sadly become about what every thing else is about...$$$. Generally, you'll hear me say that money isn't crucial to educating kids. Give me some good desks, some graphig calculators, some good textbooks, and enough to live a middle class lifestyle and I'll be happy. To make funding based upon test scores is great in theory but when you put getting money at the forefront of things, don't be surprised when you get some nasty results.

NCLB's focus on testing as the sole criteria for success is a major failing that needs to be fixed. And I think it will be -- although probably not this year.

Money is what it takes to get you those things you just enumerated, and they aren't that cheap. But you need a lot more than that. You need a safe facility in good repair that is warm in the winter and cool in the early fall and late spring. You need transportation to get kids to and from school safely. You and the kids need administrative support. And then you throw in the kids that need special attention for a variety of reasons, which we as a nation have decided also deserve a public education.

Education isn't all about the money. But it should be noted that it is accurately called a public education, not a free one.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

All of which are long overdue AFAIC.

In some schools and districts, yes. NCLB isn't without its merits. But it will not be due in many of the schools that this law will apply it to.

[ColtCrazy]

Well, I teach 5th grade and I will readily admit that the whole system is fucked up (it's so nice to find adults to cuss with)

Anyway, as far as teachers go.
There are a lot of great teachers out there, but there are also more than their fair share of teachers working for paychecks (in this profession?) or teachers that are barely brighter than the students they teach. Teachers need to be held accountable, and I know I'm in the minority of teachers when I say this. But what system really works? The knock on standardized tests is that teachers will simply teach the test. On one hand, I have no problem with that. If the test is based on state standards, then aren't you teaching to the test if you cover state standards??? That's our job! On the other hand, I don't agree with just spending your time finding creative ways to "cheat" on the test. I know some teachers like to teach shortcuts on certain testing procedures. What does this accomplish? Does the student learn anything? Good teachers deserve good pay, but I see no way to make it fair. Students that come through are a lot like the sports teams we watch. Sometimes you have talent coming out your ears, and other years you have students that will struggle to pass. A lot of that depends on multiple factors...none more important than parenting.

So what about parents? Do they deserve bonus money? I will readily admit that a lot of my good students come from good homes...but I have good students that are succeeding despite their home environment. Does that mom deserve another $100 in meth money? Call me a cynic, but I've seen good kids come from both types of homes...and I've seen bad come from both as well.

I just see no way you can reward someone, teachers or parents fairly. Besides, at the end of the day...isn't doing the most for our student or child what we are supposed to be doing anyway? You want better scores, improve teacher pay and make teacher training HARDER much harder, so we don't get the mental lightweights teaching the future that we have now. Then set up educational programs for parents that need help raising their children. Offer tax credits for the parents that go through the program AND show improvement in the child's education.

Okay, can someone help me put this soap box away?

[chesapeake]

Good points, Colt. I often hear the complaint about "teaching to the test." It always seemed like a silly point to me. Since I was tested in every class I took growing up, it would seem to me that every teacher is teaching to some kind of test; the real question is whether the test you are teaching to asks the right questions.

If states paid new teachers better, it would be a major step toward improving our schools. As it stands, you get the dedicated few who would teach for free and a bunch of folks who can't find something that pays better.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by rowech

Sadly, I do teach Geometry proofs and it's one of the worst things to teach because there's not any kind of direct way to show them. It's all about teaching the kids to see patterns that happen over and over again. Plus, there's not too much use for them other than the "teach them to think logically" approach which, to me, can be done in other more effective ways.

At least the way I remember, it wasn't about patterns, it was about memorizing the specific correlations and whatever. The biggest problem though, was that it is entirely theoretical - I can take any problem with numbers and relate it to a real world example where it might actually come up. It didn't help that I had bigger problems with that teacher (she threw out my first test because I was "cheating" because I didn't show my work - when I pointed out to her I sat in the front of the room and turned my test in well before anyone else, she changed her policy to where the correct answer was worth 1/3 and the work showing how you got there was worth 2/3. I proceeded to get 33's on every test and an F for the class.)

Every school should have a baseline funded by the state and then can be voted upon for extra money if need be. For Ohio, it's stupid because the funding is mostly on property tax value so the poor districts get screwed and the rich districts get everything. It's been ruled unconstitutional three times now in the state of Ohio, yet somehow everybody sits on their butts and does nothing.

The problem with that is that you have huge fights in this town at town meetings over whether to raise real estate taxes to pay for the schools - which almost always pass, but by less than 10%. Make those payments go into a state pool, and they would fail every time. I understand the argument that inner-city schools should be better funded, and it has some truth, but I think the chapter in Freakonomics did a good job on this.

They had a new magnet school in Chicago and a random lottery for who was chosen from those who applied. Unsurprisingly, the kids at that school had a much higher graduation rate and college attendance rate. Given this, it was hailed as a success and they started talking about how to make every school in the city like that. Then an economist came in, ran the numbers and found that the graduation and college rates were statistically insignificant from the graduation and college rates of those who applied and were rejected. This confirmed my belief that if you have competent parents who care and want their child to do well academically, they will generally do better than others. (If you want to get deeper cultural arguments, look at the difference between asian and hispanic/black academic success rates. Or just ignore this if you want to keep the thread on topic.)