Bad Kids in Class [Palm Beach teachers: 'We leave teaching because of kids' bad behavior.']

Re your post #138. Wow. Thanks for that link. I agree with him. Completely. Because for some kids, more failure in school is really NOT the ticket.

OK, and here's another component: if kids have the option of taking a 1-2 year leave of absence after 8th grade, because they fail the tests for high school entrance or they are too much of a discpline problem, then, they have to turn in 52 weeks (if they decide to return to school after a year) or 104 weeks (if they take 2 years off) worth of paystubs from a job to qualify for their driving license. That would motivate a lot of kids to stay on a job.

And, if, after their leave they really don't want to return to school, or, they really don't want their job, then, they also have the option of entering a military boot camp (instead of these alternative schools that are often a waste of time), so they can prepare for a GED and join the military. I had 8th graders who actually wanted very much to serve in the military, but they hated school because of their low reading levels. Kids like that might choose a boot camp -- and benefit from it.

I am just trying to think out of the box here. What we have now is often not working...as you know!

After 8th grade, if a kid can't pass the tests or is a discipline problem, let the kid take a leave of absence -- and go out and work 40 hours per week in a low paying service job.

Agreed. Speaking as a product of FL government schools, I like this idea. Also, I'd like it if they institute a real "zero-tolerance" policy: any physical assault that's not made in self-defense on or off school grounds against another student will result in permanent expulsion and trial as an adult for battery, at the junior high and high school levels. If they see the value of an education while guests of the state, they can work on a GED. Something along these lines would get quite a few troublemakers out of the classroom for good. Now if they turn to criminal activity, they better not try my house while I'm at home, if they value their life. :-)

The "entrance exam" idea for high school is a good idea too, especially if at the college level they chuck Gen-Ed over the side. That's two less years wasted on stuff you should've acquired in high school, and two more years actually learning stuff for a degree.

Ironically, Trotsky finds the teaching is more tolerable at Sabal Palm because the school is strict enough and students' time managed tight enough that it cuts down on discipline problems.

He and all these other disillusioned teachers ought to think about hiring themselves out as tutors for homeschooled high schoolers! They'll have a group of kids who are EAGER to learn, and they would probably be a great source of comfort for parents who would love for their kids to be homeschooled for high school, but don't have as much confidence in their abilities as they did with the elementary work. The teachers may not make as much money, but it would be way less stressful, and they would not have to worry about being threatened with bodily harm!

Thank you so much for your post, adx. I'm very grateful for your support of my post there.

BTW, if I had any interest in politics in terms of running for office -- well, I am not kidding: I would propose this idea. I know it is too radical for some, but I think for many people, it makes sense.

I do feel education should be available for those who want it, but for others -- including those students described in this article, who believe school is just a another word for zoo -- let them out already. I really think it would help on so many levels: by working fulltime at jobs, some of those kids might mature and become motivated; the schools would immediately be less crowded; more teachers would remain in teaching; the learning environment of schools would improve, etc.

Wish I had it in me to run for office. I'll bet FL voters would seriously consider this.

The "entrance exam" idea for high school is a good idea too, especially if at the college level they chuck Gen-Ed over the side. That's two less years wasted on stuff you should've acquired in high school, and two more years actually learning stuff for a degree.

I agree.

Re your post #144 - Another great idea.

This is why I think conservatives are often surprising -- because if you eliminate all the political connotations of the word "progressive" you wind up solely with a word that means: "change." And, what more conservatives than liberals want in education is: "change." Not the status quo.

Why are the politicians NOT talking more about these kind of issues in this FL election year?

Hopefully, as we get closer to the elections, we will hear more about this issue from the candidates. You are doing a fine job of educating us here on FR and elsewhere about the progress that Jeb has made here in Florida. He should hire you to advise his campaign!

Having said that, I really believe that many of the needed changes can and must be made on the local level. School superintendents, school boards, and administrators need to listen to what teachers and parents are saying, and change policies based on those recommendations. Politicians and teachers unions have their own agendas that often are at odds with what is best for the students. The best thing lawmakers can do is to pass laws that allow local school districts set policies that are in the best interests of students, and not try to micro-manage school policy.

When a parent could give his kid a couple swats on the fleshy part of the behind, kids behaved better. Now we are supposed to discuss things with a child who doesn't have real perspective on the world and life. Only through pain do we learn. Goes for children and grownups.

LOL...thanks for your kind words, Truth Addict!

BTW, Gov. Bush has passed a law giving local school districts more flexibility in their spending.

And, I agree with you -- in theory -- that change should come from the local level, but I must tell you: in a non-partisian Public Agenda survey, a full 70% of teachers said they believe are not heard at the local level.

I have seen decisions made in school districts that go against what the teachers, parents and students want. School boards and administrators often do what only they want.

For example, it's very frustrating to watch an entire community protest a decision to spend $14 million to build more administrative office buildings, instead of spending that money on students and teachers -- and see 5 people on the Board of Ed say to a community: Too bad, tough luck, we are spending that money on new offices anyway.

I don't know how this changes -- I guess we wait until the next election.

...said: they believe they are not heard at the local level.

After 8th grade, if a kid can't pass the tests or is a discipline problem, let the kid take a leave of absence -- and go out and work 40 hours per week in a low paying service job.

Someone suggested on another thread yesterday that college students whose tuition is 'paid for by the government' should be required to pick peaches during the summer (or something similar) to pay off their debt to the taxpayers. One of the BEST IDEAS I've ever heard.

Thanks so much. I think here at FR we have created a better platform for education reform than any FL Dem gov candidate. And, who knows, maybe our reform-minded current governor will someday come upon this thread, and see the support for this idea.

Thanks again for your post, wkwe! :)

I have seen decisions made in school districts that go against what the teachers, parents and students want. School boards and administrators often do what only they want.

That is because, like most politicians and bureaucrats, they become entrenched in their own little fiefdoms, and lose sight of their purpose, which is to create and maintain an excellent educational environment, and instead only act in a way that enhances their own power base.

If we approach this using a business model, the school board corresponds to a board of directors, school administrators to executives, teachers to those who produce the product, and parents as the consumers, we can see how to prioritize things. Teachers know more about how to improve the product because they are the ones producing it, and see the results immediately, so they should have more say in what changes need to be made. Administrators should see to it that the business is run efficiently and productively, and keep out of issues that are beyond their expertise. The board should be attentive to the voice of the consumer (the parents) who have the most at stake in the quality of the product, which is the education of their children.

This is not a perfect analogy by any means, but I think it gives us an idea about who should have a greater voice in making educational decisions. Teachers have the most knowledge about what works and what doesn't, and parents have the most at stake in the results.

This reply was proof of your infantile emotional state. Now sit down and eat your peas. They're getting cold.

Kids these days...

When you're through with your condescension and name calling, give me a ping, and we'll continue the debate. This reply was not proof of anything other than the fact that I was bored by your post and didn't feel like I needed to defend my position any longer.

You're right and wrong. I see by your profile page that you are rather young, and I'd guess that you don't have children yet.

That is correct ma'am, but it doesn't mean that my opinion is any less valid (not to imply that that's what you meant). I was pretty badly beaten as a child for the same reasons as set forth on this thread and for what? I never drank, I never smoked, I never took the car out, I always ate my peas (take that Homeschool Mama), I never did anything. And on top of that, I was a pretty sickly kid. I had heart problems and such. But as a first child in a household where my parents (God Bless them) were young and inexperienced, they didn't know how to handle the most benign of "infractions," if one could even call them that. It wasn't me that was out of control, as my parents would readily admit today, having had more children since - It was THEM. I was just a guinea pig. And while I'd like to think that I turned out okay, I know some issues I may have are a direct result of the "physical discipline" and I know I would be a heck of a lot happier if it never happened. Now granted, we're not just talking about a swat on the backside. We're talking about some more severe stuff. But as I say in almost all of my posts, beware of the slippery slope. Also beware that just because you think you're not hitting your child hard doesn't mean you aren't. The psychological effects are more damaging than the physical ones. For me, it got to the point where if my mom or dad raised their hand to run it through their hair, I would flinch all the way across the room. I was terrified. The only thing this form of discipline taught me was fear and anger. And it only ended when I fought back and believe you me, it was brutal.

I'd agree that some corporal punishment can be abusive, but there is also a place for it. For older children, a discussion and/or taking away privileges is often more effective. My teenager would rather be spanked, because it would be over quickly - doing without the telephone for a few days is much more painful!

Agreed, but I think taking away of privileges could be equally effective for a younger child. Its just like the death penalty argument. As a Catholic, I'm pro-life and no matter how much it may pain me to be anti-death penalty, I am. And the solice I find in this position is the fact that a lifetime in solitary confinement is twenty thousand times worse than death. A week without TV/video games for a young child is an eternity. The child would learn his/her lesson and thankfully, he/she won't flinch the next time you raise your hand to scratch your head.

On the other hand, you'd be amazed at the value a quick swat or two can have for a younger child!

Maybe. You could also be amazed by the amount of harm you could do as well. Its a crapshoot - do you want to risk it?

I think part of the value of spankings at school was the "humiliation factor" - but then, I think a lot of what is wrong with children now is that we're too worried about their "self-esteem" and not worried enough about giving them a sense of responsibility and a sense of shame when they've done wrong.

Well, I can't speak to the "humiliation" factor thing, as I've never been spanked in school. Like I said before, I wouldn't trust that kind of responsibility with a teacher. But think of it this way, if humiliation is a good way to teach your child a lesson, why not make him/her stand naked in the middle of the street with a big sign reading "I've been a bad boy?" That would be pretty humiliating, but is that the best way to handle the situation? Look at the very word "humiliation" and determine whether you would actually want to do that to your child in his/her formative years. I know I wouldn't.

"he's only 12 but huge for his age"

i'm no vegetarian, but have you ever seen what "minority" kids eat? no wonder they're huge. heaping portions of meat, junk food including chips and ice cream, rice, whole milk, tahitian treat, sprite, gallons of koolaid, very few vegetables. meat (with the help of the foodstamp program) is served at every meal (breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks) it is generally fried in shortening, bacon drippings or lard.

i'm not surprised these kids are giant and starting puberty much earlier than, say even 20 years ago. they're also having severe health problems due to diet and of course, medicaid is paying for it (not to mention all the gunshot and stabbing wounds, premies and drug/alcohol abuse programs)

bringing back paddling and uniforms is a start, but these kids already have no fear or respect for anyone.