http://www.ips.k12.in.us/

This touts all the virtues of IPS. So are you saying all this is a lie? There is no cake?

IPS schools have all experienced the same funding cuts in recent years, and with a number of random student-placement scandals (that being that better students are placed in better institutions where the better principals move and hire better teachers), I can't say with accuracy how my instructors were because I really wasn't aware of it at that time. However, I can say that most of my instructors now (at UHS) don't have teaching licenses - private school, they don't have to - and are unrealistically better than public school teachers because they've developed a community and every single one of them shows an undying care for their students that I don't believe could be replicated in a public setting, including those that are considered the "high" or "gifted and talented" classrooms in public schools.

I don't know when the last time was that I trusted an organization as a judge of its own value to society. Doesn't change here.

I've got baseball because I am at a school where I actually can play every day unlike the school I would have gone to if I'd stayed public. Later.

Ugh. Bo, the more you say the more evident it becomes how little you actually know--at least on this topic. You don't even have any "known unknowns," they're all "unknown unknowns" for you. On a side note--who doesn't miss ole' Rummy?

I think my state does an excellent job with its public schools. However, Maine also has the advantage of being diffusely populated enough that each city or school district only has one high school (with the exception of Portland, which has two). So while the rural districts have their own unique problems with drugs, poverty, and high dropout rates, many of those are more easily overcome than the violence and generational poverty that plagues many urban schools.

Interesting, hecks...it sounds like the primary trouble-makers in the schools of Maine are people like To Kill a Mockingbird's Ewell family. New England tends to have strong public school systems in general, though.

I would say Canada's school system is very good. Our schools are funded provincially rather than locally which sidesteps the US's problems funding inequities between school districts. There are local school boards that represent local interests, but nobody is promoting creationism, intelligent design or any other nonsense be taught in schools.
Ontario, my province, has 4 school systems; English, French, English Catholic, and French Catholic. Parents are free to send their kids to any system they like.
The Catholic systems are a legacy thing. I don't mind parents wishing kids to have a religious upbringing, but all religions with a significant population should be represented. As a child my neighbourhood had a significant Ukrainian immigrant population and most of these kids had to go to Ukrainian school after regular school. As a kid I alway thought it was unfair that they didn't get to play after school or join after school sports teams or activity clubs. As an adult it seems unfair that their parents have to pay extra for a Christian Orthodox education when Catholics are covered with basic taxes. Recently the Ontario government tried to broaden the school system to allow other religious schools. The hew and cry from the Catholics and inertia nixed it. It's sad that religions consistently defend their own right to freedom of religion, but not any other religion's right to the same.
20 or 30 years ago Canada relaxed it's eurocentric immigration laws and the population if browning considerably. I think this is going to become a problem as immigrants settle in and start to feel confident about demanding their rights. We should end the Catholic school system or broaden the system to include all religions, but not have a system that favors one Religion over others. It's not a real problem now, but I can see it becoming one and it would be easier to resolve if we addressed it before things get too heated.

"better students are placed in better institutions where the better principals move and hire better teachers"

Exactly my point. You probably went to one of those "better schools" before goin private.

"However, I can say that most of my instructors now (at UHS) don't have teaching licenses - private school, they don't have to - and are unrealistically better than public school teachers"

The problem with teachers (my humble opinion) is the college education they get that trains them to be the lousy teachers they are. Every new crop of teachers coming out of college has some new "Gee WIZ!" great idea for how to better instruct the students, even though the tried and true methods of the past worked just fine.

I also would note that, at least at Michigan State, the crop of students I knew there that were in education were, generally speaking, blithering idiots. Much like Yellowjacket, these people couldn't argue their way out of a box. The standards to getting in to education, I suspect, are too low, thus allowing it to be a fallback position for the kids that couldn't get in to the degree program they wanted. Either that, or they wanted to get in to teaching because "it looks like FUN!!!" Which is fine....you should enjoy your job...but...

I'm not saying all teachers in public schools are bad by any means, and certainly don't want to ruffle the feathers of the local teachers here...but between my own education, and now watching my daughters experience public education (which is generally decent in our district) I find it is anyone's guess as to whether or not you are going to get an effective teacher from year to year/class to class.

But all in all...what matters the most...is the student's desire to learn...and whether or not they have a parent at home that encourages them. If you have a wiling student and support at home, *any* student can learn in *any* situation....meaning that, more than anything, I indict the families of America as much or more than I will indict the school systems or teachers.

""better students are placed in better institutions where the better principals move and hire better teachers"

Is that a problem?

UK

We have a educational system that changes so often that by the time I describe it, it will be out of date.

On attainment we are average within the OECD for reading, maths and science at age 15. We are 13/33 for reading; 19/33 for maths and 9/33 for science.

Finland, Canada and Japan and Korea all score highly.

http://www.geographic.org/country_ranks/educational_score_performance_country_ranks_2009_oecd.html

The UK ranking mask how diverse attainment is within the UK. Our independent fee paying schools do exceptionally well and we have some of the best universities in the world.

This is one area where we can learn from the best systems worldwide whilst retaining the best of what we have. The Finns tend to place a high regard on the professionalism of teachers and start formal teaching much later (at aged 7).

@Krellin,
My college didn't have an education major. Instead, it was one of the most demanding minors at the college. You had to major in something else, and the education minor (as many required credits as most majors) covered the requirements for your teaching certificate. I rather liked that system. It guaranteed that teachers coming out of the school were meeting the same requirements as everyone else, rather than focusing on high-school level material and its delivery.

^ That way, they graduated prepared to teach something they knew about rather than just to teach whatever came along.

"The standards to getting in to education, I suspect, are too low, thus allowing it to be a fallback position for the kids that couldn't get in to the degree program they wanted. "

In short... Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach those that can.

@Hecks - that seems a better concept that an entire program focused on producing a teacher, who ends up being a person that knows a little bit about a lot and has lots of fancy new education tricks up his or her sleeve.

My mother and I volunteer taught a class at a private school in our church many years ago - she taught science, and I taught English (no cracks about my webdip spelling...they are typos to typing too fast and not caring) I had curriculum provided to me, I built my lesson plans, adapted them on the fly as needed if the student needed more focus on something...I'm not saying I was the best teacher ever, but I can tell you for certain that I did not need a 4 year degree to teach my class, nor did my mother.

IN fact, I would say that my real-world working experience, giving business presentations, etc. was just as valuable, and also gives you the ability to talk to students about, you know, *real life* and how the things you are teaching them are important for their future, as opposed to someone who has spent their entire life buried in academia, with no real experience.

I had to laugh when we went to curriculum night at my daughters high school and her "Business Foundations" teacher gave us his spiel about how he was going to teach our students was the business world was like, etc....when all he has ever known is school. Laughable concept.

@krellin--While I whole-heartedly agree that students and families have far more to do with educational success than teachers, I would take issue with your assessment of the teaching "crop." You're absolutely right that there is a new buzz-word or philosophy at least once a semester that we're all supposed to pretend to care about--and almost universally we nod our heads and smile and then continue teaching the way that we have already had success. That, however, has been the case since long before I was born...it's not even close to a new phenomenon.

I do take issue with teachers being classified as less capable than everyone else. That's complete and total horseshit. I may start requiring that everyone I talk to submit a 50-page dissertation on a subject of their choosing (mine happened to be the extent of American knowledge of the holocaust and German treatment of Jews prior to the liberation of the first concentration camp) and passing the PRAXIS II in their chosen field before I dialogue with them. There are most certainly idiot teachers, but I would argue that there are far fewer idiot teachers than there are idiot (insert almost anything else). Save for perhaps doctors and engineers, I will hold the line on that statement.

@krellin - "I had to laugh when we went to curriculum night at my daughters high school and her "Business Foundations" teacher gave us his spiel about how he was going to teach our students was the business world was like, etc....when all he has ever known is school. Laughable concept." I do have to agree with that. I spent 5 years in the "real world" before going back to get my teaching certificate.

@murray - Unfortunately krellin is right in many regards. I know many a math teacher who started college life studying physics or engineering and realized the discipline of both was too much so they dropped back to an education degree with a focus on mathematics. I even know one or two Informtation Technology teachers at the local high schools who couldn't write a program to solve a simple maze or compute the relative trajectory for the shortest distance between two cities on roughly the same latitude but an ocean apart.

@murrayshoes -- My problem with all the gee wiz new fancy teaching concepts is that sometimes it isn't in the teacher's prerogative to ignore. For example, my kids are forced to go on-line to some math web site where they have to do math "homework"...it is *multiple choice*...how in hell is a kid going to learn their math fundamentals clicking a fucking mouse, and not even being *able* to show the teacher their work? When we have complained about it to multiple teachers, they say that they are forced to use it - required by the school district...because they laid out the money to buy the license or whatever. some of the teachers actually like it (these teachers should NOT be teaching math...), others admit that it's probably not good, but have no choice because the school administrators/unions/whatever are forcing them to (gotta find those kickbacks...), and they will get in trouble if they don't make the kids use it (because the schools can log in and see if the students are using it).

So yes - certain ideas can and are dismissed by good teachers that stick to effective methods. But other teachers are forced to....or are too dumb to realize that subjecting my kids to a new, *unproven* teaching methods is UNETHICAL.

@murray -- the problem with the incapable teachers that we speak of is that your god damned teacher's unions won't allow them to be fired. Your fucking *tenure* system allows the lousy teachers to hang around.

In the REAL WORLD, the fuck-usp get thrown out on their ass. IN the education system, the lousy teachers become the butt of jokes, and then they perpetrate their education fraud on my children.

@draug - Though I don't want to argue (as I think we're largely on the same side), what problem is there with someone who wasn't able to complete high-level engineering courses teaching high-school or middle-school level math? Does not being a successful engineer stop them from being very good at helping kids understand algebra or geometry? On the flip side, I guarantee you that several engineers would make shitty math teachers. Knowing something and being able to teach it effectively are two completely different beasts.

Around here, the really bad teachers get promoted to vice principle so they can't fuck up the kids any worse.

Most of the best teachers I've had majored in something else, then went back for their M.Ed. My sister double-majored in mechanical engineering and physics and worked as an engineer for five years or so before deciding she wants to teach. Now she teaches seventh grade. The only parts that frustrate her are 1) when the administration does something counterproductive and 2) when she tries to explain fractals to seventh-graders.

@krellin - Like I've said, I've spent time in the "real world," and you and I both know that the fuck-ups don't get weeded out. I've worked with them for a long time--I've been managed by them. They become higher-ups in companies and get elected to public offices. Fuck-ups can be just as successful in the "real world" because of their connections. Lumburghs of the world exist, and with alarming frequency. If you have a problem with unions, so be it--I'm not going to try to defend them.

On a side note, I agree that a district implementing an unproven education system that ends up causing more harm than good is extremely unethical.

@murray - I actually agree with that assessment over all (and I know I hate teaching in the classroom even though it is an ocassional part of my job to educate the clients in our software best practices and how it works). But I was just pointing out that the "those that can do, those that can't teach" applies here. I'd rather a math teacher for my kids (if I had kids) that loved math and engineering but couldn't cut it in the real engineering world than a teacher who just said "fuck it, I'll be a teacher and get my summers off". The problem with schools who have general education degrees is they graduate the latter type as often if not more so than the former. If all schools forced Education to be a minor, then offered degrees in watered down versions of applied mathematics, theoretical or applied physics, history, English lit, or other fields (child psych and early child development would be good for elemntary school teachers) then we would have a crop of teachers who knew the field and/or students they were teaching well enough to at least do rudimentary work in the field they teach. Admittedly, it was 1982 so early in the IT field being taught in high schoolm but I learned more about computers from trial and error and writing my own programs and hacking on them than my high school teacher ever taught me. And those types are still around and the system cranks more and more of them out every year.

I am a Bachelor of Education from Edinburgh University with more than 20 years' English language and literature teaching experience in a number of countries, including 10 years in Scotland.
Unless you are totally in control, as I am now by dint of circumstance, teaching sucks big time. Suggest KFC.

@draug - We again seem to agree more than we disagree. I know that the "fuck it, I'll be a teacher and get my summers off" people are out there. I had them as teachers when I was in school and I work with a few of them now. My argument is that there aren't as many of them as the general public seems to think. I am certainly not arguing that they don't exist, however. I will also grant you that the poor teachers who are in the system teaching right now do a huge disservice to their students and to the teaching profession as a whole. Before going into education, I worked (rather successfully) as a business salesman for CareerBuilder. I was quite successful and I made a great deal more money there than I have in education. I hated , however. I went back to school to turn a hobby of mine (history) into a career. I am now certified to teach the social sciences, and I both love what I do and am quite good at doing it. I think people like me are becoming more and more the norm than the pejorative "those who can't do, teach."

@timur - Total side note, but my wife and I honeymooned in Scotland. We spent most of our time in Edinburgh, and visited Stirling on a day-trip. It's a beautiful place.

"I hated , however"...don't know where the "it" went--certain I put it in there. It must have had a mind of its own and left before I hit post...

On that note, however, I have to go. Thank you for an intelligent discussion.