How would you reform the US Education system.

[The Mystery Machine]

For many students the senior year of high school could be eliminated. The brightest kids could certainly do well with a year of community college. The student who desire a trade could do that. Trade programs could be set up in such a way that students can receive their associates degree while pursuing the trade. My dh is an hvac mechanic and his younger union members receive college credit for their trade work and require a few extra courses to turn it into an associates.
In every high school I work in senior year is a waste for the majority of students.Those who aren't on an academic track take as few classes as possible and fill the rest with study hall or electives or leave early for a job at a burger place. It gives them money but doesn't prepare them for a career. The gifted students are filling their schedules with ap classes. And they can't always get the ones they really need. They're just taking them to look good for college. Why not have students do sr. year in a cooperation with the community college while doing sports and activities at the high school. This way they could transition into college while still having the help of their guidance counselors and families, receive credits that work toward their degree and diploma and free up classroom space for underclassmen. It will give them a small taste of freedom. Students who are heading into trades can take a combination of easier CC classes and their trade work. Most CC's offer both. And the money we spend on their sr. year can knock a year off of college tuition.

Our school already does this, it is called dual enrollment.

The reason you need the "dual enrollment" piece is because when you are entering college as a freshman, you cannot be graduated from HS. The reason is that you cannot get merit aid, scholarships, etc. otherwise.

You need the "freshman" classification for college.

 

[golfgal]

How about a compromise?

Have 1/2 credit of health and 1/2 PE required for middle school so you can get in the exercise, health stuff and the other semesters you can take other classes, like business, programming, computer, etc....

This is what they get to do in high school. Is is REALLY that big of a deal that your DD spends an hour or two a week in PE??? Doesn't your middle school offer those classes already, ours does even with a PE requirement. See, this is a BIG part of what is wrong with the schools, you have a parent or two that make a huge stink over something THEIR child doesn't like and expects the schools to bend to their wishes. There are how many other hundreds of kids at the school? I think the real problem is that you have a bright kid in a sucky school.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

This is what they get to do in high school. Is is REALLY that big of a deal that your DD spends an hour or two a week in PE??? Doesn't your middle school offer those classes already, ours does even with a PE requirement. See, this is a BIG part of what is wrong with the schools, you have a parent or two that make a huge stink over something THEIR child doesn't like and expects the schools to bend to their wishes. There are how many other hundreds of kids at the school? I think the real problem is that you have a bright kid in a sucky school.

I am in MO. We have lower standards here. One of the reasons my youngest hated to leave TX.

Private Catholic schools have a better track (only a few) however my kids are not going to Catholic schools one in part because they are aethists. It just would not work out.

And I have never made a "stink", we are discussing how we would reform school here on this thread.

I think that there is more value in kids being able to take more technology or other classes rather than PE for some kids.

I want kids to excel. How awesome would it be for the jocks to sign up for PE in a sports track for HS and other kids to have the option to sign up for MORE computer or other classes.

This thread is about reform of the schools. This is why we need reform. My kid in MO should have the same options as kids in other states. However since we run the schools state by state we will never have that and they will set their own standard.

 

[kwitcherkicken99]

I think that Europe has it right... start getting the kids ready for post-education early.

Separate the schools into those who really want to be there (those who go on to serious professional work - doctors, lawyers, CEO/CFO), and those who are going into a skilled trade (accountants, construction, electricians, educators), and those who don't care, keep them at another one where they learn basic requirements (not much different than what we have now). That way the kids who need to stay focused on academics can, and not be distracted by someone who could care less about what they are doing/those who are in school because they have to be.

It would be the easiest way to get our kids back on track and get them focused on career goals again.

 

[MrsPete]

So what is wrong with optional PE in Middle School. Why are you so opposed to it?

How about instead of PE they take software classes and learn the stuff? I think you have just made my case that we need more options for kids in school.

Oh, you're talking middle school? Being a high school teacher, I always think about that automatically. Middle schoolers need PE even more than high school students. They aren't ready to sit still in desks all day long. They NEED more movement. They NEED downtime. You could make an argument for recess as opposed to formal PE, but at that age they need it badly.

I don't see why you want kids to "specialize" and begin to study only their strongest subjects at that age -- except that your own child really hates this particular subject, and you'd like to excuse her from something she finds distasteful. I said it before, the first 12 years of school are for exploring a wide variety of subjects, tasting each one, and often finding that something you'd thought you'd dislike could actually become a strength. Later, as adults, they can pick and choose what they prefer and go with their strengths.

 

[MrsPete]

Our school already does this, it is called dual enrollment.

The reason you need the "dual enrollment" piece is because when you are entering college as a freshman, you cannot be graduated from HS. The reason is that you cannot get merit aid, scholarships, etc. otherwise.

You need the "freshman" classification for college.

Yeah, I think it'd be a rare high school that didn't offer the dual enrollment option, and personally I think that for many students it's a better choice than AP classes. But that doesn't mean I think they should do away with senior year.

 

[MrsPete]

I think that Europe has it right... start getting the kids ready for post-education early.

Separate the schools into those who really want to be there (those who go on to serious professional work - doctors, lawyers, CEO/CFO), and those who are going into a skilled trade (accountants, construction, electricians, educators), and those who don't care, keep them at another one where they learn basic requirements (not much different than what we have now). That way the kids who need to stay focused on academics can, and not be distracted by someone who could care less about what they are doing/those who are in school because they have to be.

It would be the easiest way to get our kids back on track and get them focused on career goals again.

Tracking students based upon ability was outlawed years ago, and it will never be brought back.

I understand why they did it: The kid who was a slow reader in 1st/2nd grade (but who then got the hang of things and really took off academicaly) was not allowed to move into the upper level track. He was condemned to stay where he started. And many minority students were placed automatically in the lower track without much real thought on the subject; I'm sure we'd agree that was just plain wrong. But we've gone too far in the other direction now.

 

[kwitcherkicken99]

Tracking students based upon ability was outlawed years ago, and it will never be brought back.

Ah, but with their system it's not tracking... it's purely what the parents/kids decide for them to do.

There is regular schooling (all the basics) up to a point. Around middle school (7th/8th) is where they begin to specialize. Then that's where the branches of schools come in. It's not ability level, it's what the kids plan to work towards. They don't cherry-pick and say, "Johnnie, you'll be a doctor. Suzy, you'll be a restaurant manager." The kids have to decide on their career goals early and work towards that.

I think a lot of people would benefit from a system like that. It would eliminate a lot of what-ifs by the time they reach their senior year and have no idea to their course of action for the following 5 years. The kids are too wishy-washy on their goals (if they have any at all).

For example, I work with an absolutely brilliant young man. He's got no idea what he wants to do next year. Due to his intelligence, high class rank, and test scores, a lot of universities are requesting early enrollment (and some in honors college) that are due in less than 2 months. He's got no clue what he wants to major in nor does he have any career goals. It's sad and even he knows it. Had someone sat him down and help guide him down a path I think he'd be far better off.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Yeah, I think it'd be a rare high school that didn't offer the dual enrollment option, and personally I think that for many students it's a better choice than AP classes. But that doesn't mean I think they should do away with senior year.

It is not rare. When we were in TX there was no CC around. So that is why there were so many AP classes. A-HA.

Here in MO they have a few AP classes and then dual enrollment as the major push. In fact AP classes are rare here. We moved into a district specifically that offered them. The main push is dual enrollment however the criteria is strict and really rips off kids here. It is not good. Many schools cater to the "gifted track" to the point of harming many students with class choices.

So you think it is a better choice to do dual enrollment? I am debating and researching this issue for my 8th grader. She has time obviously.

Here is my issue with it right now. She wants to go to an upper tier college as of right now. She has her sights set pretty high. She has the grades and test taking ability so far. She will probably be the kid with scholarships (thank goodness).

As I am reading some of the admissions they require at least 2 SAT subject tests. Now, I would think that an AP class would be a better base to take the SAT subject test., right? IDK

My older dd was an average student and did not take SAT subject tests. She did take a lot of AP and enjoyed it, however did not hit the right score to get credit.

If my younger one ends up going to a MO college will she have a better chance of gaining credit through an AP test score of 5 or a CC class? You see the dilemma? If she ends up "out of state" at a higher college, then I would think an AP class would be better than taking classes at a CC in Missouri.

Anyway, that is what I am struggling with now. Because I do not know.

 

[daughtersrus]

My question is why should that be done with educational dollars? Addressing medical issues should be the domain of the health care system, and that's part of why our educational costs are so much higher - because our for-profit medical care system has shifted much of the burden of providing care and accommodation for disabled children to the school system.

The majority of services that a SpEd student receives is not medical. If you want to shift the responsibility of educating these children to the health care system, what do you think is going to happen to health care and insurance costs?

You are deliberately being obtuse. Children for the most part learn to potty train at home, to dress themselves, to tie their shoes, to use utensils etc.

School is for academia - math, science, history.

If a student cannot master academic subjects they have no business being in a school. If they cannot do the work they have no business graduating.

Not at all. Your definition of school in not accurate. Schools supposed to educate students.

Totally disagree with you there. First of all, the vast majority of special ed funding is spent on academia such as math science and history. Depending upon the child they may or may not be learning at the same level, but most Special Ed students do learn academics. You also need to realize that a large percentage of the Special Ed population is not mentally disabled. They are quite capable of doing grade level work, they just have differing needs.

What you seem to be referring to is the profoundly disabled. While I strongly agree that it is expensive for any school district to address the needs of these children, I also strongly disagree with you that it shouldn't be done at all. For every life skill gained (toileting, ability to self-feed etc) Dollars spent in childhood helping the child learn these independence skills will save the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in long-term care costs over the life of that individual. Look at the difference in cost between Assisted Living or Sheltered Living Facilities and Skilled Nursing Home care and you will get an idea of the point I'm trying to make.

Quite honestly this is one area where the Federal Government really needs to step up and increase funding because it is burdensome for a school district. We are talking about a very small percentage of the student population here though and I seriously doubt these students are what is "sinking" the education of the average student population.

With all due respect, none of those are social skills that couldn't be taught just as well using a spelling game or a math drill game or a history trivia game. For most kids who are really bad at PE, the only social skill they are learning is how to tolerate being continually insulted without losing one's temper.

For the kids that are bad in math, spelling, science, history... the only social skill that they will learn with these games would be the same as the student that is bad in PE.

give as much attention to gifted education as they do to special ed..

There are many kids SpEd students that are highly intelligent. My DD has a SpEd student on her caseload that is in all honors classes.

 

[golfgal]

With all due respect, none of those are social skills that couldn't be taught just as well using a spelling game or a math drill game or a history trivia game. For most kids who are really bad at PE, the only social skill they are learning is how to tolerate being continually insulted without losing one's temper.

Also, in regard to what I mentioned earlier re: basic training, I just checked my home state's current graduation requirements with regard to PE. They still require it, but interestingly enough, there is a condition for specific exemption: enrollment in ROTC.

So you think a one size fits all approach is the way to go then because that is what you are suggesting.

 

[Colleen27]

This is what they get to do in high school. Is is REALLY that big of a deal that your DD spends an hour or two a week in PE??? Doesn't your middle school offer those classes already, ours does even with a PE requirement.

Hour or two a week? At the middle and high school levels, its an hour a day for at least one school year (and in some states, an hour a day EVERY year). Here, kids have to spend as much time in PE as in American History or Algebra I or Biology. We dedicate more school time to "teaching" PE than we do Civics - kids have to have at least a full year of PE, but only a semester of learning how our system of government functions.

 

[golfgal]

Hour or two a week? At the middle and high school levels, its an hour a day for at least one school year (and in some states, an hour a day EVERY year). Here, kids have to spend as much time in PE as in American History or Algebra I or Biology. We dedicate more school time to "teaching" PE than we do Civics - kids have to have at least a full year of PE, but only a semester of learning how our system of government functions.

They learn about Civics in other classes too-all along the way in their education. Civics is just more concentrated. Our kids have a full year of civics in 9th grade but have learned a lot along the way in other social studies classes and will continue to do so through high school. For some kids PE is the ONLY exercise they EVER get. Also, ask the teachers, kids, especially middle school and younger NEED to burn off that energy during the day through PE and recess. I could tell the second our kids walked in the door after school if they had inside recess or not that day and our kids are no where near hyper.

This whole PE thing is getting ridicules. If you don't want a PE requirement in your schools lobby your congress people to get it removed and see how far you get with that.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

They learn about Civics in other classes too-all along the way in their education. Civics is just more concentrated. Our kids have a full year of civics in 9th grade but have learned a lot along the way in other social studies classes and will continue to do so through high school. For some kids PE is the ONLY exercise they EVER get. Also, ask the teachers, kids, especially middle school and younger NEED to burn off that energy during the day through PE and recess. I could tell the second our kids walked in the door after school if they had inside recess or not that day and our kids are no where near hyper.

This whole PE thing is getting ridicules. If you don't want a PE requirement in your schools lobby your congress people to get it removed and see how far you get with that.

We are discussing how WE would reform the school system not how we are going to go and lobby Congress.

This thread is like, what would you do after winning Powerball thread.

 

[LisaR]

It is not rare. When we were in TX there was no CC around. So that is why there were so many AP classes. A-HA.

Here in MO they have a few AP classes and then dual enrollment as the major push. In fact AP classes are rare here. We moved into a district specifically that offered them. The main push is dual enrollment however the criteria is strict and really rips off kids here. It is not good. Many schools cater to the "gifted track" to the point of harming many students with class choices.

So you think it is a better choice to do dual enrollment? I am debating and researching this issue for my 8th grader. She has time obviously.

Here is my issue with it right now. She wants to go to an upper tier college as of right now. She has her sights set pretty high. She has the grades and test taking ability so far. She will probably be the kid with scholarships (thank goodness).

As I am reading some of the admissions they require at least 2 SAT subject tests. Now, I would think that an AP class would be a better base to take the SAT subject test., right? IDK

My older dd was an average student and did not take SAT subject tests. She did take a lot of AP and enjoyed it, however did not hit the right score to get credit.

If my younger one ends up going to a MO college will she have a better chance of gaining credit through an AP test score of 5 or a CC class? You see the dilemma? If she ends up "out of state" at a higher college, then I would think an AP class would be better than taking classes at a CC in Missouri.

Anyway, that is what I am struggling with now. Because I do not know.

From my research, it is all dependent on the university she plans to attend and what they will accept. Every school is different. I have read about schools that have taken all AP and dual enrolled classes and some that haven't taken any. It is a crap shoot!

In our state, if you have an AA from an in-state college, you are automatically accepted into any of our four year universities. My DD is very motivated and it is her goal to graduate high school with her AA. Unfortunately, we do not have any way of knowing if she/we are making the right decision. Time will tell, I suppose, but I hope we haven't given her bad advice.

 

[powellrj]

I can tell you that living in a state that has had school choice for 20 years-long enough to know if it works or not--that the bad schools are still bad and the good schools are still good and giving a choice does NOTHING to change that. The main reason kids use it is to get into a district that has programs, usually sports, that they want. VERY few kids actually use it to move from one district to another for academic reasons. It also points right back to the FAMILY values in education vs the schools being at fault for the kids not succeeding. The worst district in our state (the Minneapolis public schools) has free busing for kids that want to move to a better, suburban district and only a handful of kids each year take advantage of that. Vouchers are NOT the answer but I LOVE having our statewide open enrollment option and would NOT change it for anything even though it isn't making the bad schools better-it does help if you have a job transfer, etc.

While that may be true for your district, that is not the case for ours.

Our former system of 9,000 kids lost 1,374 this year, yes the number is accurate and if you want I can PM you the link to our local newspaper to show you the articles where parents DID pull the kids out of a failing district to attend surrounding ones that are succeeding. The school my DD attends doesn't even have a football team so parents didn't leave for THAT sport and they took the largest number of transfers. They increased the size of the school by 1/3. They had the room and the staff so they went for it! I talked to her teachers at open house last week and they were thrilled to have the new students. I didn't realize what a leap of faith it was for them to take on the new students, because they had no idea what kind of students they would be getting, but they said they were so happy because the transfer kids were great and all came ready to learn.

My old system was ruined by the fact that the school board was run by retired teachers who put the needs of the teachers ahead of the students. They paid bonuses that basically bankrupted the system and the state may have to take over the system by 2012. Their reasoning was happy teacher make for happy students. Not when your systems is listed 3rd from the bottom in state ranking and your teachers are in the top 10% when it comes to pay.

I always use to joke that my kids were educated in spite of the old school system instead of because of it. When less that 20% of your graduating class goes on to college, you have major problems.

 

[Hoodie]

This is actually an interesting thread, mainly because my husband and I were just discussing why people are so dissatisfied with the public school system. We live in a school district that is not only the top in the state, but also consistently is in the top 10 school districts in the country. Yet at a recent gathering of our moms (and dads) group, we discovered that 4 couples out of the 6 there were planning on sending the kids to private school. One of the remaining 2 couples were public school teachers and the other couple hadn't started to think about it yet (our kids are about 18 months old). We come from all different backgrounds, political and religious beliefs.

Something is fundamentally wrong with our public schools when only 1 in 6 parents are willingly sending their child to one of the best public school systems in the country.

 

[freckles and boo]

There are many kids SpEd students that are highly intelligent. My DD has a SpEd student on her caseload that is in all honors classes.

This is especially true of many children with autism. There is going to be a huge wave of autistic adults hitting society in the near future and if their educational needs aren't met we will pay later. My child is one of those kids. She is very intelligent and has as much potential as her "normal" sister but she receives "special education" because her brain is wired differently.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

From my research, it is all dependent on the university she plans to attend and what they will accept. Every school is different. I have read about schools that have taken all AP and dual enrolled classes and some that haven't taken any. It is a crap shoot!

In our state, if you have an AA from an in-state college, you are automatically accepted into any of our four year universities. My DD is very motivated and it is her goal to graduate high school with her AA. Unfortunately, we do not have any way of knowing if she/we are making the right decision. Time will tell, I suppose, but I hope we haven't given her bad advice.

I know, it is a crap shoot. Signups for HS are in Jan so we have a little time to map it out. She will be going the honors track hopefully and so she will have the option of choice.

The problem here is that if she goes out of state taking the CC classes may be looked down on as opposed to taking AP. I don't know. Maybe it does not matter as long as she has the scores.

There is no benefit here in MO with taking AP vs CC that I know of. In the end it is all about the score you got when taking the AP test as to whether you got credit or not.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

This is actually an interesting thread, mainly because my husband and I were just discussing why people are so dissatisfied with the public school system. We live in a school district that is not only the top in the state, but also consistently is in the top 10 school districts in the country. Yet at a recent gathering of our moms (and dads) group, we discovered that 4 couples out of the 6 there were planning on sending the kids to private school. One of the remaining 2 couples were public school teachers and the other couple hadn't started to think about it yet (our kids are about 18 months old). We come from all different backgrounds, political and religious beliefs.

Something is fundamentally wrong with our public schools when only 1 in 6 parents are willingly sending their child to one of the best public school systems in the country.

Yes but you are an east coaster. I would think it is more about reputation of the private school than the school itself maybe?

Like the movie "Baby Boom"? You have to go to the right preschool, etc. to get into the right college?

It is resume building? And honestly if I could afford a private non religious school, we would do it. However that does not exist here.