What we have is a flawed system working within a flawed society. Schools instituted a weak curriculum (Everyday Math, Look-Say Reading). That does seem to be turning around.
However, in society, we have also seen larger numbers of broken homes, more single parents, more permissive parenting, and an upswing in lawsuits.
All of these things combined have given us the results we see today. If you are of the opinion that public schools have NEVER been a good solution, that's fine. I don't agree. Schools used to teach the basics better. Society used to do a better job too.
But to take the problems we see today and insist that the whole problem is the flawed school system is ridiculous. Education will not be fixed by abolishing public schools because that will only put more pressure on the societal problems we have.
Kids who live in chaos, kids whose parents can't get things together enough to get them to a free breakfast on time aren't going to suddenly function well enough to seek out good educational opportunities. Heck, they won't even remove their kids from failing schools when given the opportunity to do so!
I don't feel hopeful for the future of our inner city schools and students. I wish I had a solution to their many problems. I don't.
No Dianna, I don't think that.
As a matter of fact, I know differently.
Public Schools use to be an excellent learning institution, even in the big cities.
But, like it or not, that's all changed now and despite the countless number of reasons for the institution's demise it is a fact that they are what they are.
What to do about it? I don't have all the answers either but the present course is unacceptable.
I think we just need to get over the idea that big cities are a good thing.
“However, in society, we have also seen larger numbers of broken homes, more single parents, more permissive parenting, and an upswing in lawsuits.”
All the above ideas are encouraged philosophically in public schools. The more failed the “family” one comes from, the more Bohemian and heroic.
[QUOTE wikipedia] In 1946, Spock published his book The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care, which became a bestseller. By 1998 it had sold more than 50 million copies. It has been translated into 39 languages. Later he wrote three more books about parenting. Spock advocated ideas about parenting that were, at the time, considered out of the mainstream. Over time, his books helped to bring about a major change, if not a reversal, in the opinions of those who considered themselves to be the experts. Previously, experts had told parents that babies needed to learn to sleep on a regular schedule, and that picking them up and holding them whenever they cried would only teach them to cry more and not to sleep through the night (a notion that borrows from behaviorism). They were told to feed their children on a regular schedule, and that they should not pick them up, kiss them, or hug them, because that would not prepare them to be strong and independent individuals in a harsh world. Claims that Dr. Spock advocated permissiveness Some have seen Spock as the leader in the move toward more permissive parenting in general, and have blamed him for what they saw as the negative results. Norman Vincent Peale claimed in the late 1960s that "the U.S. was paying the price of two generations that followed the Dr. Spock baby plan of instant gratification of needs."[citation needed] Vice President Spiro Agnew denounced him as the "father of permissiveness," claiming that Dr. Spock's child rearing principles encouraged lawlessness among young people in the 1960s Spock's supporters believed that these criticisms betrayed an ignorance of what Spock had actually written, and/or a political bias against Spock's left-wing political activities. Spock himself, in his autobiography, pointed out that he had never advocated permissiveness;[citation needed] also, that the attacks and claims that he had ruined American youth only arose after his public opposition to the Vietnam war. He regarded these claims as ad hominem attacks, whose political motivation and nature was clear [/QUOTE]