I guess I should clarify what I mean by intelligence. I mean more overall eliteness. Go-getting type A people who don't party all through college. Nerds. Pre-med, science, math, and engineering students. The type of people who aspire to more than just going to the crappy local 13th grade college. Those are the type of people going into teaching in Finland. That is impossible in the US as long as unions are keeping starting salaries down in the gutter to justify the idiotic idea of tenure.
Those people are teaching in Finland because the people of Finland put a higher priority on it. People in general, in this country, don't. And how do you back up the statement that unions keep starting salaries in the gutter? Non-union states range from the middle to the low end of starting salaries.
That statement is from the proposal by the superintendent of the DC area school who offered the union an optional deal in the contract where a teacher could willingly give up tenure but be allowed to receive merit pay and 6 figure salaries. The union didn't even allow a vote. This was all from Waiting for Superman which is what got me fired up about this. Normally I don't give a crap because my kids are going to private school anyway.
They actually did vote on, and pass, a merit pay contract with 80% voting for it. Maybe they didn't vote on the original plan because the terms of what constitutes "merit" weren't clear. Merit pay is great as long as you've got a good evaluation process... Something DC is still struggling with.
I have to wonder if you gave An Inconvenient Truth as much credence as you give this movie.
I guess I should clarify what I mean by intelligence. I mean more overall eliteness. Go-getting type A people who don't party all through college. Nerds. Pre-med, science, math, and engineering students. The type of people who aspire to more than just going to the crappy local 13th grade college. Those are the type of people going into teaching in Finland. That is impossible in the US as long as unions are keeping starting salaries down in the gutter to justify the idiotic idea of tenure.
I am one of those people...I was in teaching because I wanted to teach, and I can tell you it was not the union that made me quit, it was much more than that.
Parental income level is easily the #1 predictor of academic achievement. The school board also makes a huge difference. Here in Peters there is a cabal of board members that control things. They renewed the superintendent's contract in a contentious 5-4 vote in return for sneaking a $3M+ athletic field through the budget process. Peters only spends ~ $10K+ per student/per year due to the anti-tax sentiments in the district. USC spends ~ $14K+ per year. They have 3X to 4X the AP courses available in Peters plus the state's only baccalaureate program. USC is the only place to live in Western PA if you want your kids to get the best possible education.
The funding for public schools in PA also is very skewed to institutionalize the advantage in wealthier districts. Peters lost ~ $800K funding out of a ~$52M budget due to Corbett's cuts. That is less than 2% because we weren't getting much $$$ from the state due to our property tax base. Less affluent districts lost 30%+ of their operating budgets due to state funding cuts.
Its sad that Corbett and his minions punished the kids that needed the most help.
Its easy to attack teachers, but kids in communities that place a high value on standard of living (as evidenced by income levels) and achievement will outperform kids in lower income districts because parents in higher par capita income areas will impart an expectation of achievement into their kids.
Even if you go to a single district like Pittsburgh I would bet the students at Allderdice do better than other high schools in the city because of the income disparity. It has nothing to do with allegedly better teachers at Allderdice. The achievement gap is because of the parents.
Plus communities like USC that elect school board members that are committed to providing the best possible educational opportunities for kids will outperform districts like Peters that are more affluent, but have a constituency that doesn't want to pay for the absolute best quality education.
I think the government needs to conduct a war like effort on education. Parents need to be educated to understand why its critical that they make sure their kids are high achievers.
Technology, automation, & globalization have comoditized and marginalized many occupations that used to provide a traditional middle class standard of living for many Americans that wouldn't be classified as high educational achievers. I think high unemployment is here to stay because we have a class of workers that don't have the skills to compete in the 21st century global economy. Plus there is another class that may be college educated, but the skills they acquired aren't competitive in the global economy so they are employed in areas outside their educational expertise.
I don't like arguing politics but I am very disappointed that issues like gay marriage are more prominent than education in the Presidential race. Nobody seems to care about the current and long term macroeconomic health of the US.
I'd say USC is better because they don't cheat the system to make it show they make AYP in all categories but really this isn't a good judge on how good/bad "good" school districts are doing.
I know from experience its not that hard to get kids on the right track. Its kind of like the earlier poster that talked about teaching kids how to learn. My oldest kid is 15. My wife had to stay on her case for maybe 1 school year. I think it was 3rd or 4th grade when I instituted a 95 or better in all core subjects rule. My wife monitored her homework for a school year. After that, my daughter understood the expectation, appreciated the rewards, and developed the will to achieve on her own with very little parental intervention. Most schools (including Peters) have an online system that will automatically send a daily email message to parents with all grades for tests, homework, participation, etc. Its very easy to monitor progress and intervene if standards aren't being met.
Its more about parents instilling a mentality in kids than it is about parents doing their kids homework or helping them study for tests.
Peters special ed blows, but USC isn't good in that area either.
USC has better PSSA scores than Peters despite Peters having higher per capita income. Plus USC offers 3 to 4 times the AP courses of Peters and the baccalaureate program. If a parent wants their kids to get the best possible HS education there is no comparison between USC and Peters.
Peters doesn't want to incur the incremental cost to offer the best possible education. The relatively high PSSA scores are a factor of per capita income. The district doesn't do anything to take our kids to the next level like USC.
I know from experience its not that hard to get kids on the right track. Its kind of like the earlier poster that talked about teaching kids how to learn. My oldest kid is 15. My wife had to stay on her case for maybe 1 school year. I think it was 3rd or 4th grade when I instituted a 95 or better in all core subjects rule. My wife monitored her homework for a school year. After that, my daughter understood the expectation, appreciated the rewards, and developed the will to achieve on her own with very little parental intervention. Most schools (including Peters) have an online system that will automatically send a daily email message to parents with all grades for tests, homework, participation, etc. Its very easy to monitor progress and intervene if standards aren't being met.
Its more about parents instilling a mentality in kids than it is about parents doing their kids homework or helping them study for tests.
While I disagree to a high degree on your method I understand the reasoning behind it. I do agree that when the parents outline what they expect it helps the children because of the clear guidelines, I also agree that the expectations should be high but IMO education isn't about grades, grades do not matter, education is more about on the how, why, and if progress is being made rather than the A, B, C, D, etc. To sum up the problem with American education and expectations I quote a professor I met from England, "When my European students don't do well on a paper they come to me and ask what is wrong with the paper and how it could be improved, when an American student of the same peer group doesn't do well on a paper they come to me and ask what is wrong with them."
Grades and standardized test scores matter because if a student does poorly in those areas it will limit their choice of colleges which could impact their potential career choices and standard of living. There are pragmatic life long consequences to poor grades and SAT scores.
Grades and standardized test scores matter because if a student does poorly in those areas it will limit their choice of colleges which could impact their potential career choices and standard of living. There are pragmatic life long consequences to poor grades and SAT scores.
Not really. But I'm not here to judge your parenting. You did what worked for you. I disagree with it but it's your child and I'm no one to tell you how to raise them.
There is a difference between possibility and probability. My objective is to provide my kids with the most probable path to happiness, not force them to travel a difficult path with less than optimal circumstances.
My niece is a SR at West Mifflin HS. She is kind of a social butterfly and underachieved relative to her potential. She wants to study premed for dental school. Her parents have the $$$ to send her to the school of her choice. She would like to attend Allegheny and/or Case Western but has very little chance of getting accepted there because she made poor choices as a teenager. If she buckled down a bit more her path would be easier.
I know the father of a young woman in Peters that was Valedictorian (not as impressive as it sounds, there are usually 20+ each year in Peters) in Peters a few years ago. She went to W&J and graduated with honors. She applied to 20 dental schools and got accepted at 2. She is going to Pitt's dental school. If it is that tough for a kid with an impressive background, how hard will it be for my niece? If she misses out on 30+ years of a career that possibly could have been her dream and allowed her to do something she was very passionate about, was it worth it to have some extra fun in HS with kids she probably won't even know by the time she is 25?
There is no way a kid has perspective to understand the consequences of their choices as a teenager. Plus it isn't as if my daughter studies 24x7. She plays tennis, does a few HS clubs and civic community service, and still has plenty of time to waste on video games, computer surfing, reading recreational books, going out with her friends, watching hockey with me, etc.
I want to make very clear I'm not telling you how to parent or saying it doesn't work. I'm not arguing with your parenting style, just that I disagree with it. I would add though that children in high school and then "adults" in college straight out of H.S. really have no idea what they want to do. Many people end up with degrees they don't like, in jobs they don't like, even making good money but hating it because they were forced to adhere to a certain structure by their parents. That's not the path I will push on my children and if they choose that path then so be it but I will not put undo pressure on them to do well when they will know I expect their best and they know I will support decisions they make. They will be aware that if they expect to go to med school the expectations for that will be outlined for them and it is their responsibility to achieve them not mine to set and force them into. As far a the "path to happiness" who's happiness? Yours or theirs because it sounds like you're leading them on your path (good grades, high SAT scores, straight to college, etc.) instead of letting them find their own. Again I'm not telling you how to parent, it works obviously, but again I don't agree with it.
I wouldn't force my kids into professions. My oldest (daughter - 10th grade) wants to be a special ed teacher. If that is her passion I fully support it. I want her to be happy so I wouldn't force her into a STEM profession even though our country needs them at the macro level. I wouldn't force her into a profession to make a higher standard of living.
That said, I do make sure she is in all honors/AP courses and will take the most advanced math and science possible. If she changes her mind about her profession she will have the background to enter any possible major in college. There is no reason she shouldn't do well in school. The path to happiness is doing something you are passionate about. Poor academic performance limits options and excludes potential passions.
I wouldn't force my kids into professions. My oldest (daughter - 10th grade) wants to be a special ed teacher. If that is her passion I fully support it. I want her to be happy so I wouldn't force her into a STEM profession even though our country needs them at the macro level. I wouldn't force her into a profession to make a higher standard of living.
That said, I do make sure she is in all honors/AP courses and will take the most advanced math and science possible. If she changes her mind about her profession she will have the background to enter any possible major in college. There is no reason she shouldn't do well in school. The path to happiness is doing something you are passionate about. Poor academic performance limits options and excludes potential passions.
In what way? If something is a passion people typically excel at it because they love it and want to do it. Their prior grades don't have an impact on it because it's a passion. I have not seen a college anywhere tell a student they weren't allowed to change to a certain major because of their high school grades. They're allowed to pick any major that college offers and begin the intro courses for it because they are paying to go to that school. There are so many schools in the USA that if someone wants to go to school for something there is a school that will accept them, it may not be one of the top recognized schools but the person will still learn the required skills and receive a degree in that area as long as they finish the program and continue paying tuition. Grades really don't have a bearing on life.
I wouldn't force my kids into professions. My oldest (daughter - 10th grade) wants to be a special ed teacher. If that is her passion I fully support it. I want her to be happy so I wouldn't force her into a STEM profession even though our country needs them at the macro level. I wouldn't force her into a profession to make a higher standard of living.
That said, I do make sure she is in all honors/AP courses and will take the most advanced math and science possible. If she changes her mind about her profession she will have the background to enter any possible major in college. There is no reason she shouldn't do well in school. The path to happiness is doing something you are passionate about. Poor academic performance limits options and excludes potential passions.
In what way? If something is a passion people typically excel at it because they love it and want to do it. Their prior grades don't have an impact on it because it's a passion. I have not seen a college anywhere tell a student they weren't allowed to change to a certain major because of their high school grades. They're allowed to pick any major that college offers and begin the intro courses for it because they are paying to go to that school. There are so many schools in the USA that if someone wants to go to school for something there is a school that will accept them, it may not be one of the top recognized schools but the person will still learn the required skills and receive a degree in that area as long as they finish the program and continue paying tuition. Grades really don't have a bearing on life.
Better schools open doors for their graduates. I'm sure anybody can point out exceptions, but kids coming out of Ivy League schools, the best medical/law schools, etc will have easier paths to the best employers, be part of the best alumni networks, etc.
If you take the financial component out of it (I wouldn't make my kids take out loans to cover non-scholarship costs - they will graduate debt free) there is no reason to send your kids to anything less than the best schools they can get into. Admission to the best colleges is based in large part on HS grades and SAT scores.
Like I said grades don't matter. Heck GWB went to Yale because of who his dad knew. As you said in the first part of your post with the alumni networks comment. GWB a very average student went on to be President because of who he and his family knew not because of his grades. I suppose that's an extreme example but it does demonstrate that grades truly don't matter in the real world. Money and who you know is what matters. Also not saying it's OK then to do poorly in school but it's not as important as it is being made out to be.
GWB is a good example of what I am saying. He went to Yale and that maximized his career outcome. There is an institutional advantage to coming from that blue chip background. I can assure you I don't have any strings to pull to get my kids into Yale or any other prestigious institution, so if that is something they want to pursue they will have to come by their admission the honest way (by their grades & test scores).
Clinton & Obama came from modest economic means but rose to great prominence without money & knowing anybody of influence. Their Ivy League backgrounds gave them a huge advantage, just like GWB. They needed to get into the Ivy club by grades, not by their family.
You have never sat on any academic admission committee, have you?
I have, for 10 or so years by now (for MBA admissions), and I can tell you that previous grades are a MAJOR component of any admission decision we do. In fact, looking back it's almost scary how past "slacking" can prevent admission even 10+ year later. Granted, there are always trade-offs (work experience, standardized tests, recommendation letters, the previously mentioned alumni pedigree in case of Ivy League schools), but on the margin, bad GPA sets people substantially behind.
