I agree with your notion that a kid should not have their ceiling or future (their final track) decided at a young age, there absolutely should be the availability at any point to move up if the level of effort, dedication, etc. warrant it. Just as they should be moved down if it changes in the other direction.
I'm also not for giving up on the bottom 10%.. but let's be honest, COLLEGE IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY. These kids generally need a lot more social awareness attention than they need academic attention because academically... they just don't care. And they won't care unless you give them a reason to care and until they care, you can dump a fortune into their academics and you will see very little return on your investment.
The government, the school system, can't fix these kids. They can help by providing food, shelter, academic resources to be used if wanted.... but the only thing that can even attempt to fix these kids is a mom or dad, aunt or uncle, grandma or grandpa, community friend, coach, mentor... somebody who is willing to treat that kid like they matter and tell them the damn truth... that success isn't f*ing easy, but it is possible... and that there is a 99.99% chance it's NOT going to come through sports or entertainment and that if it comes through crime, well then enjoy it while it lasts because it won't last for very long... Somebody who can have at least as much or more influence on them than their friends who are telling them they don't matter and that they are living on a dead end street.
the only reason i trip is because i think about my life, and you're basically saying i had no hope and should be forgotten about.
I don't think he's saying that.
Perhaps what he's saying is it takes work. School work. Work ethic after you are done with school. Work ethic in the sense that you aren't going to be starting off at $30 an hour. Or even $20 an hour, possibly/probably not even $10 an hour after h.s.
Work ethic goes a long way towards making oneself. You appear to have it.
Just tossing money at underperfoming schools is not going to change the students that don't see the need to be there. Education starts with the student seeing the need for education, it runs from the parent/parents also, they need to show/care/emphasize that it matters.
We don't have a damn thing in this country that is funded enough if you ask politicians. There possibly isn't a school district in the country that doesn't say "we need more money".
My son doesn't have the money to go to graduate school - so he's borrowing. He/I didn't have the money to put him through his first 4 years, so he's got loans from that right now.
He's going to graduate school. He's working full time as he does it. Why is he putting himself through that hell? He makes good money as it is.
Why is he? Because he knows the value of education. He knows work ethic. (shoot, I had to drive him to his first job, then pick him up after work).
For too many people - they don't see where putting education first will work for them, so they don't give a rip about education. Then, we get the "we need more money to motivate and educate these kids". And it never works.......so they need more money.
SwIsh, what he is saying is that a school itself cannot right the wrongs that these troubled kids face. Many of their challenges go far beyond the K-12 system.
i get that. however, that's where this endless cycle comes from.
some parents are craptastic parents. so absent parents + craptasitc schools = craptastic products of society.
those craptastic adults end up typically reproducing with other craptastic people, and the cycle continues.
at what point does our government or the morality of the people cut the cycle off?
Exctaly,
Why not give more resources to the kids of these craptastic parents, more resources that will help them do better. And when I say more resources I am not talking about throwing money at a problem.
Heck I would rather my tax dollars being spent by giving a pair of Air Jordans for all students who earn a 3.0 or better rather then giving my tax dollars to a for profit comapny.
SwIsh, what he is saying is that a school itself cannot right the wrongs that these troubled kids face. Many of their challenges go far beyond the K-12 system.
i get that. however, that's where this endless cycle comes from.
some parents are craptastic parents. so absent parents + craptasitc schools = craptastic products of society.
those craptastic adults end up typically reproducing with other craptastic people, and the cycle continues.
at what point does our government or the morality of the people cut the cycle off?
Exctaly,
Why not give more resources to the kids of these craptastic parents, more resources that will help them do better. And when I say more resources I am not talking about throwing money at a problem.
Heck I would rather my tax dollars being spent by giving a pair of Air Jordans for all students who earn a 3.0 or better rather then giving my tax dollars to a for profit comapny.
That's part of the problem though, isn't it? Kids want rewards for doing what they should just want to do.
Believe it or not (and I know you're talking education here, so I don't want you to take this too much the wrong way), for profit companies are not necessarily bad. People make a living working for "for profit" companies.
And again - I know you were specifying "for profit" schools.
SwIsh, what he is saying is that a school itself cannot right the wrongs that these troubled kids face. Many of their challenges go far beyond the K-12 system.
i get that. however, that's where this endless cycle comes from.
some parents are craptastic parents. so absent parents + craptasitc schools = craptastic products of society.
those craptastic adults end up typically reproducing with other craptastic people, and the cycle continues.
at what point does our government or the morality of the people cut the cycle off?
Exctaly,
Why not give more resources to the kids of these craptastic parents, more resources that will help them do better. And when I say more resources I am not talking about throwing money at a problem.
Heck I would rather my tax dollars being spent by giving a pair of Air Jordans for all students who earn a 3.0 or better rather then giving my tax dollars to a for profit comapny.
That's part of the problem though, isn't it? Kids want rewards for doing what they should just want to do.
Believe it or not (and I know you're talking education here, so I don't want you to take this too much the wrong way), for profit companies are not necessarily bad. People make a living working for "for profit" companies.
And again - I know you were specifying "for profit" schools.
There is nothing wrong with incentives... If you work in sales, and you meet a sales goal, what happens? You get paid, if you go past your sales goal, what happens? You receive incentives.
If receiving incentives will keep kids engaged, I am all for it(especially in this poverty areas, it will reduce crime in the long run) Ever read the story of the mom and pop pizza places that give free pizza to kids who get As on their report card? Incentives work.
I am talking about for-profit education, which is giving kids a bad education while taking money from the government. Taking our tax dollars and getting rich. I don't understand why people don't think this is bad. People who use SNAP cards and on section 8 are the scums of the earth but a a corporation who is stealing tax money, and helping contribute to the the poverty and crime population is ok.
Intrinsic motivation (the ability to motivate yourself to achieve a goal) vs extrinsic motivation (motivation through rewards given to you for achieving a goal) sits as a constant battle in educational theory. Do we emphasize longterm planning without a quick moment of gratification, or do we reward tasks with a prize?
I see the benefit of extrinsic motivation, but what we need to truly emphasize is intrinsic motivation. Only through intrinsic motivation can someone truly change their own lives. Maybe extrinsic can show them the way, but we should really emphasize intrinsic over extrinsic.
Intrinsic motivation (the ability to motivate yourself to achieve a goal) vs extrinsic motivation (motivation through rewards given to you for achieving a goal) sits as a constant battle in educational theory. Do we emphasize longterm planning without a quick moment of gratification, or do we reward tasks with a prize?
I see the benefit of extrinsic motivation, but what we need to truly emphasize is intrinsic motivation. Only through intrinsic motivation can someone truly change their own lives. Maybe extrinsic can show them the way, but we should really emphasize intrinsic over extrinsic.
big words, thanks for the definition or I would had to ask mr google lol.
I think it should be a bit of both, bribe the kids with small things, which will help reinforce the long term goals.
We are going to start potting training, I was told every time my daughter potties bribe her with sweets or candy and then bam she will want to start using the potty more, after she uses the potty she will realize that she wants to use the potty..
Why not give more resources to the kids of these craptastic parents, more resources that will help them do better. And when I say more resources I am not talking about throwing money at a problem.
Which is exactly what I'm advocating to do.. but then some kids will take those resources and run with them to improve, others will not. The kids who show the initiative and the drive, give them even MORE resources... those who are not taking advantage of the resources... well, I'm not sure what I would do exactly but pouring good money after bad on somebody who just doesn't care doesn't seem like a productive plan.
Quote:
Heck I would rather my tax dollars being spent by giving a pair of Air Jordans for all students who earn a 3.0 or better rather then giving my tax dollars to a for profit comapny.
Not sure about Air Jordans but I don't have a big problem with incentives as long as it's structured right.
Intrinsic motivation (the ability to motivate yourself to achieve a goal) vs extrinsic motivation (motivation through rewards given to you for achieving a goal) sits as a constant battle in educational theory. Do we emphasize longterm planning without a quick moment of gratification, or do we reward tasks with a prize?
I see the benefit of extrinsic motivation, but what we need to truly emphasize is intrinsic motivation. Only through intrinsic motivation can someone truly change their own lives. Maybe extrinsic can show them the way, but we should really emphasize intrinsic over extrinsic.
The problem with intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation as it applies to kids from different socio economic levels is the timeframe.
My kids don't want for much, they have a reasonable understanding how long and hard I worked to get where I am.. it's not that hard to explain to them that the work they are doing will pay off years from now, they see it every day and they know their needs will be met while they work for it..
Poor kids, kids without much to look forward to.. you can't explain to them why they should work hard for a payoff that's 10-12 years from now or for them to have this internal drive to succeed when they don't see it around them at all... kids got to eat TODAY, kid already feels hopeless.. they respond differently.
I challenged the kids I play basketball with a few years ago to a fitness challenge... mostly poor black kids about 17.. I was 48 years old.. I told them none of them could beat me.. not a single one even wanted to step up and prove me wrong. Not one would take my challenge for push-ups, sit-ups, running, etc.. the next week I brought in a $10 McDonalds gift card for the winner... 10 kids wanted to compete. It works.
Where as, my son, would compete just to beat his old man to prove he can.. he doesn't need a $10 McDonalds gift card, he knows I'll just take him there anyway.
Yes, these are kids who have fallen through cracks or are on the verge of dropping out. Just because they are in this state does not mean a school can give them a sub-par education they still have a responsibility to provide the best possible education for these kids. I feel these kids should have more funding and concentration on their education to get them prepared for the real world.
A for-profit school is only interested in making money.
I meant this particular "Life Skills" company, that take kids who have already dropped out and try to get them in position to get their GED. I don't know if they take kids who are still in school. All of the kids I knew who were in Life Skills had already dropped out of school, for one reason or another, (often pregnancy) and wanted to try and get their GED.
They have other schools in their portfolia which are charter schools. They take kids who are at risk of dropping out not just drop outs. They give them a sub-par education to get them to pass the GED and then let them fail. They get paid something like $1,500 per child per school year so 300 kids in one school year will make them $450,000 (before expenses).
Don't forget this is all of our tax dollars, why not invest that same money into fixing public schools?
So they keep kids who are at risk of dropping out, and keep them from dropping out? They give them a sub par education, for a fraction of what the local school district pays per student? (I think that Youngstown spends something like $5000-6000 per student, per year .... which is just incredible, given their results)
It seems to me that one could argue that they are giving these kids who have no shot at least a minor shot. Most of these kids who drop out, or who are in serious danger of dropping out, are probably not the most committed of students, and are probably at no risk of making the Rhodes Scholarship list down the road. If these kids get any kind of education, it could be considered a victory to some, especially considering that they were heading to no education at all on the path they were on.
Just a different point of view. I really don't know what the answer is ..... but just wanted to look at it from a different perspective.
I was wrong charter schools receive $5,745 per student so in that example its now $1,723,500. And if they do teach poverty areas, they get more money as well as tax breaks.
How can we as tax payers, thinks it's acceptable that your tax dollars are going to a for profit school.
If we want to end poverty, which will dramatically reduce crime, we need to invest more in education and get the at risk students jobs. Poor people don't want to commit crimes, they want to work.
They are taking the most at risk students, and those who have already abandoned the education system though.
I don't know how you judge them when you take into account that they take most of the kids that the public schools have either completely lost, or are in the process of losing. They have a poor success rate educating these kids, but these kids had zero chance at an education without these facilities.
These kids have already been lost by the official education system. I think that they would be doing a spectacular job if they only get 15-20% of those "lost" kids to a GED. This isn't the usual class of children. This is those who have abandoned their education, and these organizations have to convince thees kids to return and finish their High School education. I don't know why anyone would expect much more than a minimal success rate on kids who have already given up, and who are likely as not to give up again.
I am not concerned about whether my tax dollars go to public or private institutions. That is not my primary concern anyway. If we are spending $X on a child's education, and they are not getting that education in a normal school, then I have no problem using that same money to pay a specialist type school to help these kids get, at the least, a minimum type education to allow them to function in the world today.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Everybody on this board needs to take a look at this. One of the smartest guys on the planet, breaks it down beautifully. talks about what we are discussing right here, right now on this board, in this thread. i watched the entire thing, but i've been binge watching science debates and such since yesterday morning.
start at the 54:28 mark and it ends at the 1:01:48 mark.
he broke it down.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I believe a reward system for good grades would be a great motivator. I believe it falls in line with what many espouse on this very board if they would stop and think about it.
We claim we want students ready for real life. To train them to be ready for the real world. In real life, when you work hard, we tell them they will be rewarded. Yet throughout the education process they simply don't see it.
That's why I always believed in allowances for children. Do all of your chores and you receive an allowance. It's a reward for hard work and living up to your responsibilities. It's a way to back up the words you teach your children.
Now some argue that chores are simply part of being a family and that everyone should just chip in. Some say they should just do their school work and keep their grades up because an education will help them later in life.
But what example do we have to actually show kids in poorer neighborhoods that hard work has its rewards when their surrounding simply give them no examples of this and the odds of them getting any allowance is slim?
Once we are grown, our careers and the chance of advancement or the satisfaction we derive from our careers keep us going. We are rewarded by our income. I believe kids from a poverty stricken background could use a little positive re-enforcement in this regard.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
School kitchen manager fired for giving lunches to hungry students
AURORA, Colo. -- Della Curry is out of work -- and unashamed -- after being fired by a school district in a Denver suburb.
A married mother of two, Curry is the former kitchen manager at Dakota Valley Elementary School in Aurora. She lost her job on Friday after giving school lunches to students who didn't have any money.
"I had a first grader in front of me, crying, because she doesn't have enough money for lunch. Yes, I gave her lunch," Curry told CBS Denver station KCNC-TV.
In the Cherry Creek School District, students who fail to qualify for the free lunch or reduced lunch program receive one slice of cheese on a hamburger bun and a small milk.
According to Curry, that meal is not sufficient. She said she often paid for students' lunches out of her own pocket.
"I'll own that I broke the law. The law needs to change," she said.
To qualify for the free lunch program, a family of four would have to have a household income of around $31,000. To qualify for a reduced lunch, the threshold is below $45,000.
Curry said the students she helped did not qualify for either program.
"Kids whose parents make too much money to qualify, but a lot of times they don't have enough money to eat," she said.
Parent Darnell Hill told KCNC-TV Curry had helped out his son when he forgot his lunch money.
"Do something different than fire her," Hill said. "She's trying to help."
Curry said she understands the school district was just following policy when it fired her. Now she's hoping her story will lead to some changes.
"If me getting fired for it is one way that we can try to change this, I'll take it in a heartbeat," she said.
The Cherry Creek School District said they cannot comment on personnel issues, but said "anyone who has ever been terminated has violated some kind of written policy."
Curry acknowledges that did happen in her case, but said she is looking forward to addressing the school board about making changes in the lunch policy.
Cherry Creek School District released the following statement about KCNC's story:
The law does not require the school district to provide the meal to children who have forgotten their lunch money, that is a district decision. According to our practice, we provide hot meals to students the first three times they forget their lunch money and charge their parents' accounts. The fourth time, we provide a cheese sandwich and milk.
The district has worked to keep lunch prices low and still meet the federal nutrition requirements. The costs of our lunch program are not covered by the prices we charge. At the end of the year, any unpaid accounts revert back to the general fund which also covers instruction, security, building maintenance and overall operations.
I was about to mention something about immediate reward, but I didn't want to keep preaching my head off. I figured someone else would come up with why certain places may need more immediate than long term goals.
I like where we've taken this thread. Kudos to DC, Swish, and Lurker for throwing down some solid logic.
typically i get kudos for inciting riots and hate speech. So i'll take this.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I agree with DC on his previous post and might add...
The most important thing a teacher teaches a student is how to learn.
And that occurs when students feel valued and cared about!
And that is not the job I pay you for. You Teach! There are agencies I pay to do the caring stuff. They must use my tax dollars to do their job to stabilize the kids life and get them ready for you to teach! I understand the desire and caring that teachers have when they go into teaching, to help kids learn and succeed.
I tell you man to man , In 30 years of Firefighting, I couldn't save everyone even though I wanted too and I couldn't spend so much time and effort to save one person while 5 others died. Hard choices teach!
When your parents abandon you because they love drugs more, well kid, it sucks to be you!
Wrong. As an educator, it is my job to facilitate a sense of worth and meaning to students as it relates to the curriculum. That is one of the ways meaningful learning occurs. That is why we have so many Psychology classes in preparation for classroom experience, teaching how to build a positive sense of self.
, In 30 years of Firefighting, I couldn't save everyone even though I wanted too and I couldn't spend so much time and effort to save one person while 5 others died. Hard choices teach!