Count Day in Michigan

[civil]

There was a good segment (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113333281) on NPR this morning about an event called Count Day in Michigan:

A lucky student in the Detroit Public Schools system will win a 42-inch flat-screen TV. It's one of many prizes administrators use to help increase attendance. Wednesday is one of two so-called "count days" in Michigan — the day enrollment numbers are tallied and sent to the state to determine funding.

As someone who was involved in education for 12 years and is looking to get back into it, this breaks my heart. I understand and agree with the need for a student census but this is that notion taken to its comical extreme. IMO these sorts of things undervalue education and reduce it to a commodity to be bartered for.

You can read about it was well here (http://www.freep.com/article/20090930/NEWS01/909300317/1319/Districts-counting-on-count-day-as-enrollment-continues-to-dwindle).

[Deadend]

Count Days were so stupid and nonsensical when I was in school.. In Michigan. They seemed to be a holdover from the times before computers. As it would be much better to take attendance every day and average it together.. but nooo, 2 days a year determine funding.

[MagGnome]

Hmmm, that's a very interesting and sort of silly concept.

I guess the next time I need a TV I can re-enroll in high school, "Never Been Kissed"-style. ;)

[Narradisall]

I guess keeping records of attendance and providing an average is too difficult for people running a Uni.

On the plus side, free TV!

[Khrymsyn]

I have more of a problem with the idea of perfect attendance being important than I do with the TV given out...

Attendance does not = equal education, or skill level, or effort. Lots of people with crappy attendance still get better grades than people with perfect attendance.

[Kelegacy]

Hmmm, that's a very interesting and sort of silly concept.

I guess the next time I need a TV I can re-enroll in high school, "Never Been Kissed"-style. ;)

Instead of "Never Been Kissed" your movie title would be "Never Had Salad Tossed".

Oh who am I kidding. ;)

[ShivaX]

So wait... not only are they allowed to only use 2 days to determine attendance (which is horseshit) they're also allowed to bribe kids to show up on those days?

Thats the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard of.

[Ink Asylum]

Counting, you say?

B-Wd-Q3F8KM

[roboninja]

Sadly, this sound like something from The Simpsons. Is Supernintendo Chalmers running the Michigan Board of Education?

[Generation ABXY]

If I recall correctly, there is also a school (though I'm not sure where) that pays kids for attendance, though it may be for grades. Either way, I hate stuff like that. It obscures what should be the real message: The education you're getting is the reward.

[MagGnome]

Instead of "Never Been Kissed" your movie title would be "Never Had Salad Tossed".

Oh who am I kidding. ;)

No one, apparently. ;)

[Vigil80]

The situation is stupid, but when your funding is on the line, you try whatever works.

If I recall correctly, there is also a school (though I'm not sure where) that pays kids for attendance, though it may be for grades. Either way, I hate stuff like that. It obscures what should be the real message: The education you're getting is the reward.
Which is another (related) problem in and of itself. Public school education may be a lot of things, but rewarding it is not, by and large.

[pomeroy]

Attendance does not = equal education, or skill level, or effort. Lots of people with crappy attendance still get better grades than people with perfect attendance.

It may not equal an education, but it's a heck of a lot easier to get an education if you show up to school.

[Generation ABXY]

Which is another (related) problem in and of itself. Public school education may be a lot of things, but rewarding it is not, by and large.

Compared to not having any education at all? If your choices are between being rock dumb and being rock dumb, but at least able to make your mark on your paycheck, I think most people would tell you to take the latter.

Don't get me wrong, though, I certainly think our school system is in need of some reform (in fact, at either here or PiRi, there was once a very interesting topic going on about it), but this strikes me as devaluing the importance of an education.

[Vigil80]

Compared to not having any education at all? If your choices are between being rock dumb and being rock dumb, but at least able to make your mark on your paycheck, I think most people would tell you to take the latter.

Compared to private or home schooling, actually. And nevermind other countries' systems. More important than education is good education.

[Generation ABXY]

Ah. Well, I certainly support the idea of school vouchers. I tend to think of education as more of a civil rights issue than so many of the other things being touted at the moment.

[pomeroy]

Compared to private or home schooling, actually. And nevermind other countries' systems. More important than education is good education.

Yes, nothing says a good education quite like having an untrained layperson delivering information. And private schools are pretty much the same as public schools, except their teachers get paid less (which is totally a good incentive, right?).

Ah. Well, I certainly support the idea of school vouchers. I tend to think of education as more of a civil rights issue than so many of the other things being touted at the moment.

School vouchers are a joke because they don't actually cover the cost of an education and end up being a nice bullet point but only help the people who probably didn't need the vouchers in the first place.

[Vigil80]

Yes, nothing says a good education quite like having an untrained layperson delivering information.
I'm sorry, were you talking about public, private, or home schooling in this statement? You see, public schools hire quite a few laypersons (by what I expect is your definition). And the content taught in primary school hardly takes a degree to understand, which is why it can be taught to children in the first place. How many teachers do you think hold degrees within the subject they teach? I'd bet that it's fewer than you probably think.

This might be bragging, but oh well. There's still a message to internalize. I consider myself to have a unique view of the subject, since I am one of those individuals who received the majority of his education at home. I consistently scored in the 99 percentile on the state mandated tests I had to take each year. While that may not be the typical home schooling experience, I don't believe it's unusual, either. Under good circumstances, home schooling achieves what public schools strive for - one-on-one instruction, teaching at the student's pace, etc. - and at a level that public institutions can only imagine.

It's not for everyone, and it's not possible for everyone. I understand that. But I also know that when I graduated with honors from university - the first in my family to do so - public primary school had jack shit to do with it. It was all about the "laypersons."

[Generation ABXY]

School vouchers are a joke because they don't actually cover the cost of an education and end up being a nice bullet point but only help the people who probably didn't need the vouchers in the first place.

Then we could, I don't know, do it better. Just a thought.

[pomeroy]

I'm sorry, were you talking about public, private, or home schooling in this statement? You see, public schools hire quite a few laypersons (by what I expect is your definition). And the content taught in primary school hardly takes a degree to understand, which is why it can be taught to children in the first place. How many teachers do you think hold degrees within the subject they teach? I'd bet that it's fewer than you probably think.

Thanks for belittling my profession, the effort I expended obtaining a degree, and the time I spend planning purposeful lessons.

[pomeroy]

Then we could, I don't know, do it better. Just a thought.

How?

Really, how? Bonus points if you can figure out a way that doesn't completely cripple the public school system.

[Generation ABXY]

How?

Really, how? Bonus points if you can figure out a way that doesn't completely cripple the public school system.

You said vouchers were a bad idea because they didn't cover the cost of the education. The simple answer to that is, value the vouchers higher (or make the difference tax deductible).

I'm unconcerned with whether or not giving parents the right to choose will cripple the public schools.

[pomeroy]

You said vouchers were a bad idea because they didn't cover the cost of the education. The simple answer to that is, value the vouchers higher (or make the difference tax deductible).

Where is this magical money coming from (if you're going to raise the value of these vouchers)? I realize that right now the government doesn't give a shit about how they're paying for things, but it's a valid question.

I'm unconcerned with whether or not giving parents the right to choose will cripple the public schools.

Well, then. Honest, if scary, answer.

[Generation ABXY]

Where is this magical money coming from (if you're going to raise the value of these vouchers)? I realize that right now the government doesn't give a shit about how they're paying for things, but it's a valid question.

Presumably taxes. I know I'm not opposed to the government getting its priorities straight, since we're talking hypothetically.

Well, then. Honest, if scary, answer.

I don't mean it to further belittle public education, mind you. But, if enough parents would prefer the education being offered in the private sector, public schools with either have to adapt or die.

[Vigil80]

Thanks for belittling my profession, the effort I expended obtaining a degree, and the time I spend planning purposeful lessons.
By the same token...
Yes, nothing says a good education quite like having an untrained layperson delivering information.
Thanks for belittling my education, the effort I expended, and the time my teachers spent facilitating my education.

Having said that, I meant no offense to you personally, just as I'm sure you didn't mean offense to me. The effort you as an individual put into your work is not part of this discussion, as far as I'm concerned. You are hardly the entire U.S. school system.

[pomeroy]

By the same token...

Thanks for belittling my education, the effort I expended, and the time my teachers spent facilitating my education.

I'm not trying to be an asshole here, but I doubt your parents (I'm assuming they were your teachers), had the same level of training or put in the same amount of time I have. Dealing with one (or, heck, up to five...I doubt your family was that big, but feel free to correct me) is a much different enterprise then teaching a classroom of students who have different backgrounds and learning needs.

However, I will say that not all homeschooled students have a poor education, which is what my previous post implied. I just don't think homeschooling is a viable option for most people and I think it's a little silly to suggest it as one.

[Vigil80]

I'm not trying to be an asshole here, but I doubt your parents (I'm assuming they were your teachers), had the same level of training...
I would agree this statement is correct. As far as putting in as much time... well, I would have to argue that. It took a tremendous amount of commitment. But to follow that avenue further probably wouldn't add much to the greater discussion.
However, I will say that not all homeschooled students have a poor education, which is what my previous post implied. I just don't think homeschooling is a viable option for most people and I think it's a little silly to suggest it as one.
I would say that not even most homeschooled students have poor educations. And I believe I admitted up front that it simply isn't an option for many for a variety of reasons. I wasn't suggesting it as a replacement, though I do believe those that can, should. I also believe that public schools have a lot of work to do, and there just might be some things they could learn from the other segments.

When I take a moment to think, I'm not sure exactly what we are discussing. Are you saying public schools currently provide the best possible education? That all teachers in your own school, nevermind the country, are as skilled, driven, or elite as yourself? Or - this is the important one - that your own lesson plans couldn't be better if you weren't hamstrung by having to meet archaic requirements like the one mentioned in the original post?

[pomeroy]

When I take a moment to think, I'm not sure exactly what we are discussing. 1. Are you saying public schools currently provide the best possible education? 2. That all teachers in your own school, nevermind the country, are as skilled, driven, or elite as yourself? 3.Or that your own lesson plans couldn't be better if you weren't hamstrung by having to meet archaic requirements like the one mentioned in the original post?

I added in numbers to make it easier to respond to you (I hope you don't mind).

1. No, I'm not saying that. However, I also don't think they are nearly as bad as they are made out to be. Schools haven't gotten as bad as everyone says they have, they are just meeting the needs of a very diverse (and needy population) that they weren't being forced to meet even ten years ago. The mainstreaming of the classroom has made academic achievement look worse than it actually is, and most people choose to ignore that fact.

2. I would never presume to judge most teachers (for good or bad). There's bad teachers and good, just like in any profession. I do take issue with your statement of "You see, public schools hire quite a few laypersons (by what I expect is your definition). And the content taught in primary school hardly takes a degree to understand, which is why it can be taught to children in the first place." Elementary (especially primary K-2) grades shouldn't be focused on delivering content, for the most part (Don't get me wrong, an elementary teacher is delivering LOADS of content). It should be about process and skill acquisition...which does take skill to impart (and, I would argue, a degree).

3. Of course teaching would be easier if I could get rid of the requirements I don't like. But I'm a bit of a pragmatist, and don't tend to think like that. My classroom is what it is (a very diverse group of children, some of whom have little to no English vocabulary), and I deal with that on a daily basis.

[Vigil80]

Don't mind a bit. Well said. And there isn't much I would contend with.

I'll admit that my statement about the amount of skill it takes to effectively teach young children was probably hasty. I still have to wonder how many teachers who should have the level of expertise you mention actually do.

As an aside, I've been using the word "primary" as a catch-all for everything before college (K-12), not just K-2. There's probably a more correct term.

[civil]

pomeroy, you're a teacher? How did I miss that?

[Spockrocket]

Being a recent high school grad (from a public school no less), I'm honestly not too surprised that some schools may be resorting to bribing kids to come to school.

Here's the thing: Education is its own reward. I think we can all agree on that. However, most of the people who go to public school (mine anyway) have short attention spans and expect immediate results from anything they do, education included. When they don't see immediate results, they stop caring. When they stop caring, their grades go down, or in extreme cases they stop going to school altogether. A major question facing educators today is "How do we make kids care about their education?" Until someone finds a good answer to that question, we're going to see more and more of this bribery nonsense happening.

Of course there's more to this situation than what I've described here, that's just the part that I understand best, having seen it firsthand and all.

[Shieldmaiden]

The level of education and intelligence I've seen in primary (on this side of the pond, that's kids aged 4-11) school teachers is absolutely shocking. I've seen a qualified teacher deliver an entire lesson on area when they were supposed to be teaching perimeter. Spelling mistakes, missing punctuation and basic grammatical errors are rife. Many have degrees in primary education, which seem to consist almost entirely of teaching theory, with no attempt to ensure that they're actually smart enough to understand the material they're delivering.

Don't get me wrong, I've worked with some fantastic teachers, but having to work under someone who is constantly fucking up primary-level teaching is depressing, especially when the only thing they have over you in educational terms is a PE degree or something.

[pomeroy]

pomeroy, you're a teacher? How did I miss that?

I very rarely talk about my job here. It's usually so unrelated to what we discuss on the forums that it just doesn't come up.

[Widgetcraft]

You said vouchers were a bad idea because they didn't cover the cost of the education. The simple answer to that is, value the vouchers higher (or make the difference tax deductible).

I'm unconcerned with whether or not giving parents the right to choose will cripple the public schools.

We'll get on that as soon as we can get your party to concede to paying for people to get decent medical treatment when they're sick, without being bankrupted by medical bills. I find it interesting that you feel that paying for private schools with tax money is fine, but paying for medical care isn't.

Anyhow, as far as extending the school year goes, I find that to be pointless. At least two-thirds of my time in school was spent with me doing nothing but talking to my friends, or sitting quietly at my desk. The school system needs to be streamlined, if anything.

[Generation ABXY]

I find it interesting that you feel that paying for private schools with tax money is fine, but paying for medical care isn't.

Well, in theory, they're already taking out money for schools.

Also, as I have to repeatedly state, I am not entirely opposed to a government option. I'm opposed to a half-baked, rushed-through government option that does almost nothing to address the reason we have to have insurance in the first place (again, that's the high cost of health care).

Either way, this isn't really the place for that. There are already a handful of threads devoted to the freaking subject and probably just as many that have been co-opted, let's not derail another.