Disruption-or Education [Archive]

rwguinn

14th February 2011, 08:23 AM

From the Everett, WA, USA HeraldNet (http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110214/NEWS01/702149914)

... Pascal had to give a speech on the school’s television channel. He wrote a speech and, in accordance with school policy, had it approved by an adviser.

But when Pascal, 15, went on the air Feb. 7, he urged students not to vote in the elections because student government “has no real power” and its members are “just puppets of the teachers.”

Ok, it was a school-owned access, and a required speech if he wanted to run for office. But...
...School officials told the boy’s parents that he was suspended for disrupting the education process,...
Yet
School officials told Pascal’s parents that students were arguing after his speech and talking about it.
Would see to me to be education at its finest...
Your thoughts?

Pulvinar

14th February 2011, 08:38 AM

From the Everett, WA, USA HeraldNet

... Pascal had to give a speech on the school’s television channel. He wrote a speech and, in accordance with school policy, had it approved by an adviser.

You left out a rather important element:

“I knew that the key message that I was trying to get across would not be approved,” Cloutier said. “So I turned in one speech and it got approved, but when I went on the air, I gave another speech.”

Sophronius

14th February 2011, 08:42 AM

Sounds like censorship at it's finest. The democratic process is good and important and anyone who disagrees has to shut up.

TragicMonkey

14th February 2011, 08:52 AM

"Disrupting the educational process" is the school administration equivalent of "disturbing the peace"--meaning "there's no specific rule against what you did, but we don't care for it thus you shall be punished".

rwguinn

14th February 2011, 08:59 AM

You left out a rather important element:
Actually, that is implicit in what I posted, and the entire purpose of the OP...

themusicteacher

14th February 2011, 09:30 AM

Actually, that is implicit in what I posted, and the entire purpose of the OP...

I didn't catch that implication at all in the OP.

Pulvinar

14th February 2011, 09:31 AM

Actually, that is implicit in what I posted, and the entire purpose of the OP...

No, you implied that he was punished unfairly-- he wasn't. He was being punished for knowingly breaking a rule. His speech doesn't excuse this. In fact it was pointing out what should be obvious: this is a school election, not a real democratic one.

Lisa Simpson

14th February 2011, 09:40 AM

I didn't catch the implication either and frankly, if he lied in order to get his speech in, I have no sympathy for him.

TragicMonkey

14th February 2011, 10:16 AM

I didn't catch the implication either and frankly, if he lied in order to get his speech in, I have no sympathy for him.

If he hadn't lied, he wouldn't have been permitted to speak at all. I find lying to be a far lesser sin than a school pretending to encourage student speech while actively controlling it.

rwguinn

14th February 2011, 01:18 PM

I didn't catch that implication at all in the OP.

No, you implied that he was punished unfairly-- he wasn't. He was being punished for knowingly breaking a rule. His speech doesn't excuse this. In fact it was pointing out what should be obvious: this is a school election, not a real democratic one.

I didn't catch the implication either and frankly, if he lied in order to get his speech in, I have no sympathy for him.
Nice deflection and derail, folks.
The thread is about what he did, knowingly, and the "disruption of education" that resulted.
He knew he'd be DQ'ed from running. That was his intent. The suspension, and reason for it, are the topic under discussion.

KingMerv00

14th February 2011, 02:17 PM

But when Pascal, 15, went on the air Feb. 7, he urged students not to vote in the elections because student government “has no real power” and its members are “just puppets of the teachers.”

He's right.

Jon.

14th February 2011, 03:12 PM

He's right.

Of course he's right. But since when should students have anything like "real power" in a school? Student government is there to plan dances and grad, and maybe the yearbook (unless there's a separate organization for that). Curriculum, hours of instruction, hiring and firing of teachers - in other words, the kinds of decisions that "real power" entitles one to make - should be made by adults who are qualified to do so, not by teenagers.

That being said, both sides were wrong. The school was wrong twice: first, to try to control students' speeches before the fact (as opposed to punishing truly disruptive or offensive speech after the fact) and second, to think it could be done. The student was wrong to lie about what he intended to say; he should have been honest with the administration about what he intended to say, and if he were not allowed to say it, he should have made a stink about that.

Roboramma

14th February 2011, 05:14 PM

The student was wrong to lie about what he intended to say; he should have been honest with the administration about what he intended to say, and if he were not allowed to say it, he should have made a stink about that.
Far less effective to complain about not being allowed to say something than to show yourself being punished for it after people have had a chance to listen.

I don't have a problem with him being punished, but I do have a problem with the school's policy of censorship of speeches. The kid should take his punishment as a badge of honour.

truethat

14th February 2011, 05:28 PM

I don't know where the kid lives but that's a little loophole in when you can enforce censorship in schools here in NYC. If the student "disrupts the learning environment" he can be shut down. Otherwise you can't do a damn thing.

There are clear rules on this, for example "zero reject" policy means that if a student "disrupts the learning environment" based on a physical disability like say tourette's syndrome, then you just let it go.

Sounds to me they are couching it in approved lingo to try to circumvent a law suit.

whatthebutlersaw

14th February 2011, 06:06 PM

If he hadn't lied, he wouldn't have been permitted to speak at all. I find lying to be a far lesser sin than a school pretending to encourage student speech while actively controlling it.

TragicMonkey Johnson is right. Or has a point. Sure, if you think students shouldn't have any influence and oughtn't to be able to say contentious things, fine - schools probably won't shrivel and die. But ffs don't pretend that there is school democracy where there is none. That always weed me off back in high school: big words - like marmalade - about student democracy and then sweet Fanny Adams of that sort in reality. Either have the guts to say: "No, actually we don't see a need for school democracy." or practice it. Saying one thing and doing the opposite is not really cool.

TragicMonkey

15th February 2011, 04:32 AM

The funny thing is, if the point of "student government" is to teach kids about the political process, then this episode of disobedience, defiance, censorship, controversy, and media reports is wildly effective at such education. The school ought to be proud for achieving its purpose!

C_Felix

15th February 2011, 04:42 AM

I didn't catch the implication that he read a different speech either...

But...

The student body was discussing his speech? They were discussing the viability, the efficacy of Student Government? Sound like a win to me! Sounds like he sparked, what could be, a good discussion.

Lets assume the majority of student body sides with the fact that S.G. is a puppet, meaningless, neutered body. Maybe their could be discussions as to how to change that. (Which sounds like a win to me!)

TragicMonkey

15th February 2011, 06:16 AM

Lets assume the majority of student body sides with the fact that S.G. is a puppet, meaningless, neutered body. Maybe their could be discussions as to how to change that. (Which sounds like a win to me!)

Or even better, they conclude that they are powerless against the establishment, and it would take too much effort to fight back, so they resign themselves to their fates as pawns and get on with their lives! That would be the most valuable political lesson of all.

Cavemonster

15th February 2011, 06:40 AM

I'm 100% with the school on this one.

Standing up and saying that student council does not make important school decisions is like a 3rd grader in a large family gathering his siblings to complain that his allowance isn't enough to rent his own apartment.

Both are major "duh" factoids, kids who were not already aware of this, or expected more can't be very bright. Neither group is entitled to more power/money.

In case you haven't noticed, the real business of running a school is quite difficult and many are close to crisis points economically, in terms of staff and of resources, and in curriculum, and this is not because of lack of power in the hands of angsty, hormonal teens.

As for censorship in the schools, if you're surprised, you must be as naive an uneducated as this kid seems to be. There has always been censorship in schools, and it's quite valid. Disruption is not a made up concern for the gestapo to use to quell dissent, it is an immensely real problem.

Anyone who has ever taught public school, at any grade level will tell you that disruption is a huge enemy that bleeds into the limited class time and student attention span that you have.

TragicMonkey

15th February 2011, 06:48 AM

Standing up and saying that student council does not make important school decisions is like a 3rd grader in a large family gathering his siblings to complain that his allowance isn't enough to rent his own apartment.

Both are major "duh" factoids, kids who were not already aware of this, or expected more can't be very bright. Neither group is entitled to more power/money.

Then why have "student government" at all? Why bother wasting time and resources on a useless charade?

Anyone who has ever taught public school, at any grade level will tell you that disruption is a huge enemy that bleeds into the limited class time and student attention span that you have.

Except the school created its own disruption in this case, first by creating a pointless puppet body, then holding elections for it, then creating a fuss when some kid didn't say the right thing.

Just like the teachers who spend fifteen minutes of class time berating a student for being one minute late, the school magnified the actual disruption. It created its own problem to begin with, then made it even worse. But again, educational for the students--they can see the example of a bloated, mindless authority stupidly making fusses out of nothing, then putting the blame for the fuss it made on the original victims. Anybody working in the corporate world sees that sort of thing daily.

pgwenthold

15th February 2011, 08:18 AM

Then why have "student government" at all? Why bother wasting time and resources on a useless charade?

If I had been the administrator, this would have been my solution.

I would make it clear that, if students followed through on his advice to not vote and participate in student government, then we will just disband the student government.

The students do not run the school, and the student government is to provide them with...whatever they want to get out of it. If that is nothing, then we won't bother.

It's not like the students have any say in how the school is run, student government or not. The power lies with the Board of Education through the Superintendent.

Sophronius

15th February 2011, 08:22 AM

Ah, I remember the one time when my school claimed to have held a poll and declared that "98% of students enjoy going to school!". Interestingly enough everyone I knew hated school, which was already way more than 2% of the student body. No one remembered being polled, either. One wonders who they thought they were fooling.

The funny thing was that the newspapers had just announced how in the Iraq 'election' just before the war, approximately 98% of the populace approved of Saddam Hussein. Oh Irony.

Honestly, school would have been so much more tolerable if teachers and regulators would just admit that school is not supposed to be fun.

TragicMonkey

15th February 2011, 08:54 AM

If I had been the administrator, this would have been my solution.

I would make it clear that, if students followed through on his advice to not vote and participate in student government, then we will just disband the student government.

The students do not run the school, and the student government is to provide them with...whatever they want to get out of it. If that is nothing, then we won't bother.

It's not like the students have any say in how the school is run, student government or not. The power lies with the Board of Education through the Superintendent.

Um, no. Why have a "student government" at all, even if the students vote and participate and nobody makes any speeches that upset authority? It's a pointless waste of time even if it's not generating controversy. Aren't pointless wastes of time and resources considered "disruptions"?

pgwenthold

15th February 2011, 11:19 AM

Um, no. Why have a "student government" at all, even if the students vote and participate and nobody makes any speeches that upset authority? It's a pointless waste of time even if it's not generating controversy. Aren't pointless wastes of time and resources considered "disruptions"?

No, they are "leadership opportunities."

Pointless waste of time is relative term. As mentioned above, the student government has a role in things like planning the prom and organizing the cheering section at the basketball game. More active ones might find other things that they can do _with the student body_.

Student government is government of the students, by the students, and for the students. There are things that students might want to organize to do, and for that, it helps to have a leadership structure.

As I said in my response, if they decide they don't want a leadership structure, then disband it. Let them try to organize the prom and homecoming with ad-hoc groups. Let them give their money to Bob to hold in lieu of a class treasurer. But if students want to maintain that organization to help them carry out the activities that students want to carry out, go for it. It's not disruptive at all.

The problem in this case is that students are whining that their authority does not extend into things that students have no say in.

KoihimeNakamura

15th February 2011, 11:24 AM

Some states can hold scchool districts accountqble for student speech.

Cavemonster

15th February 2011, 11:59 AM

Then why have "student government" at all? Why bother wasting time and resources on a useless charade?

First off, they're far more often known as "student council" than "student government". If you were truly curious about the purpose of the exercise, you might have looked it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_council

It gives the student body a demonstration of the voting process. Those elected generally have the ear of the administrators and serve as a conduit for ideas and priorities from the student body.

They are given the authority and responsibility of planning several social and fundraising events. Many who serve consider it great early experience in organizing. Colleges consider it a positive extracurricular.

Those are just a few reasons to have it. However, if as pgwenthold said, the students have no interest, then the school doesn't need to offer it.

sadhatter

15th February 2011, 12:11 PM

i don't think he " disrupted " education, but i do think he should be punished for what he did.

If you don't want to vote, don't vote. It is not some thumb in the eye of anyone, it is simply not having a voice in the matter, and if that is how you choose to voice your opinion, by not voicing it, that is cool.

But he knew that this message would be seen as silly by the school officials, so he turned in a different speech. This is a school election, of course the kids are going to be puppets of the teachers, that is pretty much high school in a nutshell, to go on air and reiterate this is simply redundant.

If this was someone rallying against a corrupt real government i would see the situation differently. But in this case the student lied to officials in order to state a fact that is pretty much a given, though i do think suspension is a bit much. ( though i hear detention in most places has been abolished, so i wonder what option is left? Personally i saw it coming in my high school days, as the typical reaction was ' You can give me all the detention you want, i am just not going to show up. You can't lower my grade for it , so what exactly are you going to do?' )

If this had been a real issue, or one that needed to be brought to the attention of the school but hushed ( lets say a teacher was banging a student, or something of that nature. ) i would back this kid 100%. But when it amounts to hijacking an announcement to say " water is wet." i find it a silly action that takes away clout from legitimate rule breakery.

Roboramma

15th February 2011, 09:58 PM

I don't have a problem with the idea that student government should not have authority over the way the school is run. That's obvious. I only have a problem with the fact that the school doesn't want a student to give a speech about that. If it's an obvious "duh" fact, then let him say it and let everyone respond, "well, duh, we what did you think?". If it's a controversial fact, something that makes the other students think, then again, great, let it be said and provoke that thought process.

Here is a student with a point of view who wants to go to the trouble of getting it heard, probably trying to say it well. I say that's a good learning experience for him and for those who hear what he has to say. The fact that his point of view may be wrong doesn't change that. Just let him say it, particularly in a venue which is meant to be for that purpose: no, I wouldn't like him to stand up in the middle of class and start spouting off about his pet issue, that would be a disruption. But during the time he's been allotted to speak? Let him speak.

TragicMonkey

16th February 2011, 04:06 AM

The problem in this case is that students are whining that their authority does not extend into things that students have no say in.

I thought this student was "whining" that the students don't have authority in the things they are supposed to have a say in.

I don't know what kind of high schools you went to, but the two I attended didn't leave anything as important as the prom or social activities up to the students to arrange. They were allowed to make decorations for floats....if they stuck to the designs created by the art teachers and approved by the principal. Student government was basically slave labor in exchange for something stupid to put on their college applications.

pgwenthold

16th February 2011, 07:59 AM

I don't have a problem with the idea that student government should not have authority over the way the school is run. That's obvious. I only have a problem with the fact that the school doesn't want a student to give a speech about that.

Do we really know that?

The student never actually submitted the speech for approval, so we don't know what the school would have said.

For example, the school may have allowed the sentiment, but and their only "censorship" would have been to correct factually incorrect or misleading statements, such as arguments based on strawmen.

I would not be surprised if the school wouldn't have allowed the speech that was ultimately given, but that was because it was a bunch of BS based on false premises. They may have very well been willing to say, "Fix the incorrect parts and we'll approve it." Of course, if he had to fix the incorrect parts, he would not have been left with much of a message, but that's the problem when you base a case on dishonesty/ignorance.

TragicMonkey

16th February 2011, 08:14 AM

I would not be surprised if the school wouldn't have allowed the speech that was ultimately given, but that was because it was a bunch of BS based on false premises.

Good heavens, if schools didn't permit BS based on false premises, they wouldn't have enough material to teach a full four years. They could fill in the time with student government, I guess. Or P.E.

Dancing David

16th February 2011, 09:47 AM

Um, why should student have free speech over the PA:

Should they?
-promote religious indoctrination
-racism
-homophobia

granted he probably should not have been suspended for this, given detention or in school suspension, for lying about his speech.

It may have even passed or if they had bounced it, he might have won in court.

OnlyTellsTruths

23rd February 2011, 02:37 AM

I didn't catch the implication that he read a different speech either...

I didn't catch the implication either and frankly, if he lied in order to get his speech in, I have no sympathy for him.

I didn't catch that implication at all in the OP.

What OP were you all reading!? It doesn't appear that the OP has been edited...

Does the first quote in the OP not imply that the approved speech was not the one given?

... Pascal had to give a speech on the school’s television channel. He wrote a speech and, in accordance with school policy, had it approved by an adviser.

But when Pascal, 15, went on the air Feb. 7, he urged students not to vote in the elections because student government “has no real power” and its members are “just puppets of the teachers.”

Notice the second sentence in the first quote begins with the word "But".

Why would that sentence begin with the word "But" in any other case aside from what was intended by the first sentence did not occur.

King of the Americas

23rd February 2011, 06:08 AM

You get out of Student Government, what you put into it. Ours was a beauty/popularity contest, who got to decide where we had prom, and what and who got on what pages of the year book. These WERE positions of 'real power', to someone in high school. There was no illusion that they could get a teacher fired, or create a class that everyone wanted.

Had I heard his speech, I would have agreed with him, then voted for myself, won the election, and then moved to have the prom in front of this kid's house, out in the street...just to show him what kind of real power the student government has.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I never ran for student office, knowing full well I'd never be elected. Instead, I secretly backed candidates I had some sway over, so that I could have influence without holding office.

Nihilianth

27th February 2011, 10:46 AM

Far less effective to complain about not being allowed to say something than to show yourself being punished for it after people have had a chance to listen.

I don't have a problem with him being punished, but I do have a problem with the school's policy of censorship of speeches. The kid should take his punishment as a badge of honour.

Why would a school "censor" a speech given by a teenager? I mean, think about it. You wouldn't want a student to say anything crude and untoward over the school's PA system. Especially not in today's society. Imagine the uproar it would cause among parents and probably a lawsuit or two if the kid gave a speech over the PA system poking fun at another student, or swearing, or making lewd comments.

At least the school can cover their own asses by seeing a planned speech first, to make sure a kid doesn't say something which would hold the school liable for hurt feelings.

ETA: Replaced the word "school" with the word "student" whre it says "poking fun at..."

Visual Purple

6th March 2011, 10:26 AM

This article:
www[dot]firstamendmentcenter[dot]org/news.aspx?id=23890 seems to imply that the that the basis for the school's administration concluding that the speech was disruptive was "that students were arguing after his speech and talking about it." (I couldn't get the OP's link to open.) I don't have much problem with a student being punished for lying to administrators. However, if the administrators are going to treat the issue as a free speech issue--which they seem to have done--their reasoning is pretty disturbing.

Case law allows restriction of student speech if it is disruptive. If merely causing debate is construed as being disruptive, then administrators could any speech on subjects that students feel strongly about. That reasoning could end even the limited speech rights of students.

fuelair

6th March 2011, 11:05 AM

Then why have "student government" at all? Why bother wasting time and resources on a useless charade?.It is not a useless charade for the only purpose it has. Anyone who sees it as a useless charade is assuming it has other purposes - which it does not. It's purpose (essentially and in all schools I have been associated with below college (and frankly, most colleges) is simply to take student input and make decisions for events and activities. It is not designed or intended to have any effect on academia, curriculum, schedules, etc. None of those are in it's charter (if it even has one ) or it's bylaws (if it has any) or it's mandates.

I do not personally care one way or the other about the kid's speech - if it has a large effect, there simply won't be a student government that year and parents will wind up taking up the slack or activities will flail or fail. No problem. If the kids are smart enough to see it for the pointless rant it is, they vote, life goes on and our friendly agitator sees his life's bitter challenge ahead. I am fine with either.

Real government is another matter.

If not clear, he should be in trouble for not following the rules about the speech. He should have been allowed to make the speech but eliminated from the election (if anyone is really curious I will explain). And his speech should have been followed by an administration explanation of what would occur if no one was elected due to people deciding not to vote.:)

fuelair

6th March 2011, 11:09 AM

Oh, if discussion, cell phone use, texting etc is going on during classes and about the speech, the speech was, by definition, disruptive. Even if the class is civics/government, all classes have an order of instruction and a curriculum that cover what is for discussion during a given time range.

fuelair

6th March 2011, 11:18 AM

Good heavens, if schools didn't permit BS based on false premises, they wouldn't have enough material to teach a full four years. They could fill in the time with student government, I guess. Or P.E.I hope that is meant as a joke!! The five of us at my HS who teach Chemistry are thoroughly POed that they have removed electron config and other things of import to spend more time on the things they want the students to learn in more depth (and I am damned sure the people making those decisions have no idea what is needed for chemistry to prep the students for college). We sure have plenty to fill our time (the stuff isn't BS, it's just not all the most important stuff). Same situation holds in the other sciences. Can't say for other subjects as I am only certified in all the sciences, but.....

Nihilianth

6th March 2011, 12:59 PM

I hope that is meant as a joke!! The five of us at my HS who teach Chemistry are thoroughly POed that they have removed electron config and other things of import to spend more time on the things they want the students to learn in more depth (and I am damned sure the people making those decisions have no idea what is needed for chemistry to prep the students for college). We sure have plenty to fill our time (the stuff isn't BS, it's just not all the most important stuff). Same situation holds in the other sciences. Can't say for other subjects as I am only certified in all the sciences, but.....

If most non-experts had it their way, they would rather try to explain how gravity, light, and electromagnetic waves work to 8 year-olds, rather than try to define the term "mass" in a basic way for 8 year-olds to understand. ;)

TragicMonkey

6th March 2011, 02:47 PM

I hope that is meant as a joke!!

Read some of the other threads in this subforum, including those with heavy participation by some of those posting in this thread, and then tell me what the joke is, and upon whom it is being played.

The only fault in my cynicism is that it's insufficiently cynical.

fuelair

6th March 2011, 03:48 PM

Read some of the other threads in this subforum, including those with heavy participation by some of those posting in this thread, and then tell me what the joke is, and upon whom it is being played.

The only fault in my cynicism is that it's insufficiently cynical.I have (read the inputs), but having taught in several middle and high schools in Nashville TN and in Florida I have seen none in which we had time to cover, with a reasonable level of understanding for the students, just the minimum things we believe students should know to move on and be successful in college (in our subjects) or - more lately were allowed to (have to stick to what will be on the SUPERTEST). There is no trouble in filling the students with needed material, the trouble is getting it all in. We do not have to look for crazy/busy work - we have the real thing and not time enough for it.....

fuelair

6th March 2011, 04:00 PM

If most non-experts had it their way, they would rather try to explain how gravity, light, and electromagnetic waves work to 8 year-olds, rather than try to define the term "mass" in a basic way for 8 year-olds to understand. ;)

I suspect that's because even many educators seem not to understand (give lip service to, but not KNOW what it means) the ability to conceptualize. Theoretically (Ed. 102 or so) by the 7th grade (average) children are able to learn concepts and apply them. Cool. Problem is many of my 10th+ graders can't do that to any important degree. That's why they can't jump from problems that only manipulate numbers to the very same problems with words like mols,grams, particles, v^2, s^2, ad. inf. in them. I am not a math teacher!!!!! (I figure out formulas if I haven't memorized them) ) so I can show them how to do a problem and I can draw on the board the way the book wants them to to the problem and they still (even 90% of the honors students) can't figure out what the book or I are doing. Step by tiny step - and if there are words it's a no go.Very depressing.

Nihilianth

6th March 2011, 08:18 PM

I suspect that's because even many educators seem not to understand (give lip service to, but not KNOW what it means) the ability to conceptualize. Theoretically (Ed. 102 or so) by the 7th grade (average) children are able to learn concepts and apply them. Cool. Problem is many of my 10th+ graders can't do that to any important degree. That's why they can't jump from problems that only manipulate numbers to the very same problems with words like mols,grams, particles, v^2, s^2, ad. inf. in them. I am not a math teacher!!!!! (I figure out formulas if I haven't memorized them) ) so I can show them how to do a problem and I can draw on the board the way the book wants them to to the problem and they still (even 90% of the honors students) can't figure out what the book or I are doing. Step by tiny step - and if there are words it's a no go.Very depressing.

Well, I think the problem is that you are dealing with 16 and 17 year olds who probably have no interest in the subject.

I was an honor student in high school, and I struggled mightily with Math higher than Algebra. It wasn't for lack of teaching at lower grades. I was just simply not all that good at figuring out sins, cosines and so forth.

But I excelled at English, computer programming/networking, history, most sciences, and sports. (For the record, I was terrible in chemistry. Nearly failed that class. lol)

Usually it's by about 5th grade where students begin to develop the ability to conceptualize. But it's in 7th where we REALLY begin to teach the different concepts. I think it's two years late, if they are starting out in 7th grade.

fuelair

8th March 2011, 05:36 PM

Well, I think the problem is that you are dealing with 16 and 17 year olds who probably have no interest in the subject.

I was an honor student in high school, and I struggled mightily with Math higher than Algebra. It wasn't for lack of teaching at lower grades. I was just simply not all that good at figuring out sins, cosines and so forth.

But I excelled at English, computer programming/networking, history, most sciences, and sports. (For the record, I was terrible in chemistry. Nearly failed that class. lol)

Usually it's by about 5th grade where students begin to develop the ability to conceptualize. But it's in 7th where we REALLY begin to teach the different concepts. I think it's two years late, if they are starting out in 7th grade.

No sine/cosines in Chem (Honors anyway), just simple cross multiplication and division mostly - and I know the math has been covered before they get to me because I took the effort to learn the Benchmarks for Language Arts and Math for 4th grade up for just that reason! And, a reasonable number of the Honors students and some the the regular aren't interested in Chem, but they are VERY interested in having a good GPA......:):):)

I really am unhappy with what elementary and many middle schools do to the kids on science and scientific thinking!!!

theprestige

8th March 2011, 06:14 PM

School officials told Pascal’s parents that students were arguing after his speech and talking about it.

Would see to me to be education at its finest...
Your thoughts?

My thought are that if "arguing and talking" about whatever teenagers think is important is "education at its finest", we could save this country a whole lot of money by canceling all public school funding and all higher education grants, and just send everybody to 4chan instead.

Nihilianth

10th March 2011, 12:49 PM

My thought are that if "arguing and talking" about whatever teenagers think is important is "education at its finest", we could save this country a whole lot of money by canceling all public school funding and all higher education grants, and just send everybody to 4chan instead.

:eye-poppi:D

Nihilianth

10th March 2011, 12:51 PM

No sine/cosines in Chem (Honors anyway), just simple cross multiplication and division mostly - and I know the math has been covered before they get to me because I took the effort to learn the Benchmarks for Language Arts and Math for 4th grade up for just that reason! And, a reasonable number of the Honors students and some the the regular aren't interested in Chem, but they are VERY interested in having a good GPA......:):):)

I really am unhappy with what elementary and many middle schools do to the kids on science and scientific thinking!!!

I totally agree. We can definitely do better in teaching science. We should especially improve science in 5th, 6th, and 7th grades. Not sure how poor it is in 8th, but if the other three years are any indication, I assume kids are going to be behind the entire time if the basics are not improved starting in 5th.

Dancing David

14th March 2011, 07:28 AM

Nihilianth

15th March 2011, 10:21 PM

Um the key to science is lteracy and until we have all parents able to provide their children witha dequate support and encouraing education, it won't happen.

"Fourth graders should not have homework."
"I did not have to know the alphabet when I went to kindergarten."
"If soomeone hits my kids I want them to know them out."

You have five core subject and seven hours to teach the material, including lucnh PE, Art and Music, the problem is our culture and society. US citizens downgrade education, they despise and ridicule teachers.

You sound like a teacher yourself. Only teachers seem to truly understand just how HARD the job is. In fact, it is probably one of the toughest jobs you can get. It is also one of the most important, and gratifying jobs, with the least appreciation. If I did not feel this job was so gratifying personally (I love kids. They're great! And I love being a part of providing education), there would be no teachers.

The biggest, and perhaps the easiest and cheapest ways of improving the education system: Parents! It isn't about the money. It isn't about the materials. It isn't about the methods. It isn't about the length of the school day, week, and year. The single most important way of improving the education system starts with the parents. Unfortunately, parents tend to be the weak link in the system. Not all, mind you! But even two or three parents in every classroom could be detrimental enough to weaken the quality of education.

If all the parents were to show up to all the PTA meetings. If they were all to actively participate in the child's education. If they were all to support their child's teachers and provide valuable input, it owuld not only make our jobs easier, but it would make the school day be far more efficient. I dunno how many people know the amount of paperwork I send home to parents to look at and sign, which explains in great detail exactly how to help their child to study at home. I send two copies of each sheet. One in English, and one in Spanish. I provide all of my contact information. Even my street address, and always leave a note saying "I strongly urge you to get in contact with me."

What almost always inevitably happens is, the parents will sign off on whatever sheet I sent home. I know they don't read it, because nobody ever contacts me, even though I "strongly urge them to." I have three parents this year that frequently gets in contact with me. They frequently come to the meetings. They frequently give me suggestions. They are frequently very polite. Even very pleasant to be around, and are a joy to speak and converse with. They learn a lot from me about how best to help their own student. They know full well the limitations I have in the classroom for the core areas of study. That I only have 5 hours a day with them, if I am lucky, out of a 7 hour day. And you know what the results of all this contact is? Those three kids are heads and shoulders above the rest of the class. And one of them is not exactly the most well-behaved kid on the planet. (A normal 8 year-old boy with ADHD. But VERY freakin bright! It astonishes me, the books he is reading. He's at the 5th grade level already. :eek:)

I just feel bad for those three kids and parents. They spend so much time and effort in the learning process, that they cannot move too far ahead, due to the rest of the class. I have special materials for them, and the school day is more or less a review.

But yeah. I cannot stress enough just how much it would improve education in this country if parents were to get involved, and quit complaining that the course material is "too hard," or "it takes too long."

Checkmite

20th March 2011, 07:57 PM

The kid should take his punishment as a badge of honour.

Then let him do so. If his goal was to demonstrate some kind of hypocrisy on the part of the school, why are we not content to let this happen?

Seriously, what is the ultimate complaint here - that the student council should have "more power"? Over what, exactly?

Quite frankly, the only thing that kept me from hating the concept of a student council when I was a child was the fact that I knew it had no real kind of "power", and what fake power it did have was over events I never attended or participated in.

mikeyx

23rd March 2011, 07:03 AM

From the Everett, WA, USA HeraldNet (http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110214/NEWS01/702149914)

Ok, it was a school-owned access, and a required speech if he wanted to run for office. But...

Yet

Would see to me to be education at its finest...
Your thoughts?

The kid is clearly doing little more than stirring the pot and that is clearly disruption. The brat should recieve 5 years of Military school and the tentured teachers who allowed this fiasco should be fired and horsewhipped.

mikeyx

23rd March 2011, 07:05 AM

No, you implied that he was punished unfairly-- he wasn't. He was being punished for knowingly breaking a rule. His speech doesn't excuse this. In fact it was pointing out what should be obvious: this is a school election, not a real democratic one.

And if he had any real balls, he would have led an armed coup and followed up by ruling that school with an iron fist. Oh, and Regimes are for wussed, the real ones are called Juntas.

mikeyx

23rd March 2011, 07:06 AM

He's right.

Again, armed coup, decalre the teachers enemies of the state, problem solved.

mikeyx

23rd March 2011, 07:08 AM