public Education

[fairvotecanada]

If I may add, from the perspective of a teacher, you are not being ridiculous. It is truly unfair to everyone that so much time is often spent dealing with behaviour issues.

Sometimes, it is the teacher's fault... although I find it difficult to say that this is common. Some teachers just don't know how to engage their students... and keeping them interested in the topic at hand is the number one way of preventing behaviour problems.

The other problem is the relative impotence of teachers in terms of discipline. Ever since the last strike in Ontario, principals are no longer part of the teacher federations, and as such, have their own interests in the schools now. It is not uncommon for a teacher to exhaust all options while dealing with a student and finally resort to sending a kid to the office, only to have the kid come back after receiving a warning... for a repeated offense. Principals can't always be blamed as they have to look out for the good of the school, and that often means avoiding law suits. Some parents will not accept that their child is a problem or has done something wrong and if you try to tell them otherwise, they give YOU problems. Sometimes, they take things way too far and sue the teacher, principal, school, school board and/or the ministry! (The more people on the list the greater opportunity for money). School boards spend a LOT of money settling frivolous law suits... some are not frivolous, but many are. This creates an environment in school boards similar to insurance companies, with principals being adjusters. The less a board has to pay out, the better. So principals tend to want to do their part by preventing issues from getting to that point. Often this means giving parents what they want. When principals were in our union, however, they didn't need to worry about such things as they couldn't be punished for ridiculous law suits... but they can now. And students quickly become aware of the lack of discipline and do as they please, making it VERY difficult to teach.

So, partly, the problem has to do with parents no longer treating their kids like kids. They want to be friends with their kids, and want to be the 'cool' parent. Or they simply coddle their kid for any number of reasons. This leads to kids with a huge sense of entitlement and an 'I can do no wrong' approach to life. Compound this with what I said above, and there you have it... today's school atmosphere.

Don't get me wrong, the number of parent/kids like this is small compared to the rest. But they do create huge problems for everyone else.

I was reading this and wondering since I will have to vote how do I pick a good School Board for the school of this new and coming generation, and was led back in time to my French Quebec little school; I remember it being managed by nuns and a few regular teachers.

They had a way to sort the kids so that everyone got ahead of where they were when they started the school year.

Here is how they did it, each school-grade would be divided by potential

A group was the genius or quick-learner and achiever; these were thought at the pace they(the kids and teacher as a team) chose and even pushed if the teacher believed they could do better; this allowed some to skip a few grade because of previous knowledge, like if your dad thought you math and engineering as a toddler, or you were raised and thought in two official-languages as a baby. You could skip to the grade you would be learning something more, so the boy that knew Math of Sec.V only did the exam of the highest grade and never needed to attend that one since this was lower grade school; the 4th grader that could read and write english at a Sec.V level did not need to go to English class and maybe the final exams to be exempt with credit.

B group included the lazy genius and lazy quick-learner, and the average learner; this group would be fairly advance and would move along an even but careful pace as to not pass on important stuff too quickly; the difference is only obvious in the pace of learning but the matter is so questioned on exams as to be an even better method. I have managed to get in both of these group and appreciated the second when I required it, parent thought this was punishment as it lower your grade, but in fact it allowed the slower learner to change class and follow the pace that suits him or her best with that group;

C group was the slower to understand so each grade would advance at a much slower pace on the hard stuff and often work as a group(2-3) to move along once everybody in the group could explain to the next how he understood it. This helped the teacher pin-point what part of the explanation did not get through, allowing this to be corrected. I had a friend that was put in it for awhile so I had to fake a failed exam so I could follow her for about three months, stupid me...

Let's say that each of the previous level offered a sort of pride in learning and a group to belong to and learn with; who would not want to climb to a better grade and be looked at as the smart-kid from his buddy from the group. That does also build confidence which most kids seem to lack these days.

Now I believe that some school had a D group- which would have been like a remedial class for those who caused problems for the ones learning; this was forty years ago so they had no understanding that they were not all doing it on purpose and I admit dealing with this group probably was different, as I do not know how this was done.

But the idea of grouping and varying the methods allowed most kid to advance much faster then most French school around the world, I was told; so I believe this should probably be tried if more kids have difficulty learning and concentrating because of the groups that are allowed to move up a grade just to increase the average pass grade; this does not help anyone.

Just my two-cents, make of it what you will.

Edited October 25, 2008 by fairvotecanada

[Kitch]

I was reading this and wondering since I will have to vote how do I pick a good School Board for the school of this new and coming generation, and was led back in time to my French Quebec little school; I remember it being managed by nuns and a few regular teachers.

They had a way to sort the kids so that everyone got ahead of where they were when they started the school year.

Here is how they did it, each school-grade would be divided by potential

We do that now, but only in high school. Perhaps it would be effective for the young kids too, but I've worked at high schools where the kids with the lowest potential are streamed and it breaks my heart to hear how many kids think that they're stupid. They are well aware of the stigma attached to the schools that they're forced into. They're not offered courses that allow them to get into university (not that I necessarily think they could make a cut off to get in to one anyway), and sometimes they're encouraged to not even think about college.

I'm all for meeting the needs of the students, but I don't like the idea of limiting options.

On the other hand, I can't think of a better way to accommodate the students who are not strong learners.

[Mr.Canada]

We do that now, but only in high school. Perhaps it would be effective for the young kids too, but I've worked at high schools where the kids with the lowest potential are streamed and it breaks my heart to hear how many kids think that they're stupid. They are well aware of the stigma attached to the schools that they're forced into. They're not offered courses that allow them to get into university (not that I necessarily think they could make a cut off to get in to one anyway), and sometimes they're encouraged to not even think about college.

I'm all for meeting the needs of the students, but I don't like the idea of limiting options.

On the other hand, I can't think of a better way to accommodate the students who are not strong learners.

We need to separate the students who need more help from the smart ones before it gets to High School so the smart students aren't waiting around while the teacher stops the entire class to explain something to the simpleton for the 10th time.

Keep those slow kids separate from the rest of them. Not everyone is equal and the sooner the kids learn that the better of they'll be. Coddling them just makes them weak and ill prepared for the real world.

Edited October 25, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[Griz]

We need to separate the students who need more help from the smart ones before it gets to High School so the smart students aren't waiting around while the teacher stops the entire class to explain something to the simpleton for the 10th time.

Keep those slow kids separate from the rest of them. Not everyone is equal and the sooner the kids learn that the better of they'll be. Coddling them just makes them weak and ill prepared for the real world.

Smart isn't intelligent. I've heard that some high school teacher's are forced to pass some students despite their performance so that those students can get scholorships and go on to post-secondary....the parent goes to the Principal and the principal goes to the teacher and says pass so and so cause mommy and daddy said so and they're taxpayers so we have to do what they want cough cough--so people like Mr Canada advances despite his level of smarts --opps I mean intelligence--and what happens then....he says such things like the english gave indians democracy SHow me where in history did indians particpate in House of Commons debates etc. Then people like Mr Canada give the indians shit over english laws made by english people

[Mr.Canada]

Smart isn't intelligent. I've heard that some high school teacher's are forced to pass some students despite their performance so that those students can get scholorships and go on to post-secondary....the parent goes to the Principal and the principal goes to the teacher and says pass so and so cause mommy and daddy said so and they're taxpayers so we have to do what they want cough cough--so people like Mr Canada advances despite his level of smarts --opps I mean intelligence--and what happens then....he says such things like the english gave indians democracy SHow me where in history did indians particpate in House of Commons debates etc. Then people like Mr Canada give the indians shit over english laws made by english people

This has nothing to do with race. Why are making this race issue?

ALl races are smart and shouldn't have to be held back because of others lack thereof.

[Kitch]

We need to separate the students who need more help from the smart ones before it gets to High School so the smart students aren't waiting around while the teacher stops the entire class to explain something to the simpleton for the 10th time.

Keep those slow kids separate from the rest of them. Not everyone is equal and the sooner the kids learn that the better of they'll be. Coddling them just makes them weak and ill prepared for the real world.

Well, it's not as simple as that. I don't disagree with you, but I don't know that segregation based on intellectual potential is a good idea... especially when the kids are so young.

Regardless of this 'potential' that they have, they're not stupid; they know when they've been branded. And once they've been branded they can easily impose limits on themselves or they can use their 'lack of intellectual potential' as a crutch. They could externalize any responsibility for their own actions based on the label they've been given.

So it's not ONLY about coddling kids.

These kids also benefit by being exposed to others who are more intelligent, experienced and... mature(?). I know that I learned a lot just by being at university. Not necessarily in classes, just by being around people who think about ideas on a higher level than I was used to. In other words, keeping the slower learners with the quick ones might help the slow ones improve themselves. But on the other hand, you're right. As a teacher it is VERY difficult to meet the needs of your students when the range of needs is so broad.

[stignasty]

We need to separate the students who need more help from the smart ones before it gets to High School so the smart students aren't waiting around while the teacher stops the entire class to explain something to the simpleton for the 10th time.

Keep those slow kids separate from the rest of them. Not everyone is equal and the sooner the kids learn that the better of they'll be. Coddling them just makes them weak and ill prepared for the real world.

In Alberta there are different levels for the different students.

The IOP classes are for non-academic students. They can take classes that teach basic skills in the core classes. Students are encouraged to go into trades programs and are given the opportunity for on site work experience. Larger school districts have separate schools for this program.

14/24 level classes allow students to get a high school diploma. They don't concentrate on the higher academic levels but do get into such things as trig, general science and government systems.

13/23/33 level (or 10-2/20-2/30-2) has similar content to the higher level, but doesn't get into the same detail. This is the level for a student who doesn't plan to go to university but may go into certain college classes.

The 10/20/30 level is the academic route. Many students who graduate from this stream go into the post-secondary system.

[guyser]

Clearly it does matter whether or not you're involved in education. You are telling me that I'm wrong when I live this stuff and you merely speculate!

Thats true. The situation is not unique to the education industry.

For instance....

You don't know what I'm getting at? You quoted part of what I said but left out the important parts. Did you even read the info that I provided? 135000 teachers in Ontario and 5000 principals. They both pay close to the same in union dues. That means that the principal's union doesn't have the same ability to financially back their members in law suits as do the teacher federations... especially because a given principal is more likely to be named than a given teacher. (Less principals = HIGHER risk for them... I can't understand why you don't see this). Each principal could have ~100 teachers working for them. Let's say three are sued. That's one law suit for each teacher AND THREE FOR THAT ONE PRINCIPAL!

The teachers union does not back the teachers in a liability situation. They have an insurance policy for that.

So the fact that the number of teachers vs Princ is moot.

The principals do pay that yearly fee to be covered by their union, through a policy mind you. To many this is confusing. They think the union will cover them, but it is not how it works.

And by the way, we don't have 'insurance' policies as you seem to think. We pay union dues and the union provides us with legal representation and, if need be, takes on any financial liability. It is an 'insurance policy' in some sense, but that's not how it's described typically.

You have insurance policies. Stupid for them not to have them.

WHY are they reluctant to discipline students!? Kids who get sent to the office are often sent back with nothing more than a warning. Kids know that they will not be punished. I've heard it from their mouths! I specifically asked some students what happens when they are sent to the office. The overwhelming response is 'nothing much'. My fiance, who is also a teacher, has had the same experience. Her mother AND father are both teachers and have told me that principals are more reluctant to follow through with threats of discipline these days. I asked you to explain why you think this is so. You simply deflected by saying their response depends on the situation. Well, what are some of these situations?

Well, see this is where I cant really comment since I dont know. What I can tell you is anecdotal, since I can only ask a principal what he has done.

So I did.

His latest? A fight whereby about 30 kids were involved. He confiscated all the phones since he knew that kids would tape the fight. Anyone who was seen touching another student were all suspended. Went to a hearing at the board, he played the tape. Decision stood. All got 5 days suspension.

He seems to think princ should suspend more. He doesnt run into much interference with parents when he presents the truth (and the proof). He also thinks there are some chickenshit princ's out there.

It seems, unfortunately, that few of you "believe" what I've said, even though I'm not aware of any other individuals on this forum who have ANY experience as an educator.

I dont think anyone doesnt believe your experience as an educator. I certainly believe what you have posted, as far as education goes that is.

[Kitch]

Thats true. The situation is not unique to the education industry.

The teachers union does not back the teachers in a liability situation. They have an insurance policy for that.

So the fact that the number of teachers vs Princ is moot.

The number of members does matter each member's contribution to 'insurance' premiums is equal... meaning between principals and teachers. $1000/year x 5000 members provides 5 million a year for principals but $1000/year x 135000 provides 135 million a year for principals. If contributions to insurance are equal then the number of members does indeed matter. A given principal is FAR more likely to be named on a law suit than is a given teacher. (And I'm taking your word for it that this is the way different industries work. I can't think of what $1000/year/member from 135 000 members could be used for if not as insurance itself).

Well, see this is where I cant really comment since I dont know. What I can tell you is anecdotal, since I can only ask a principal what he has done.

So I did.

His latest? A fight whereby about 30 kids were involved. He confiscated all the phones since he knew that kids would tape the fight. Anyone who was seen touching another student were all suspended. Went to a hearing at the board, he played the tape. Decision stood. All got 5 days suspension.

Well, fights aren't the type of thing that principals can (or do) really be lenient about. Violence is something that cannot be and will not be tolerated. But fights don't GENERALLY happen in the midst of a lesson. The types of things that principals have become far too forgiving about are things that are not so serious so as to require immediate action but serious enough that cannot be left unpunished. For example, a student came to my fiance's door a few years ago to disrupt the class. When she asked him to leave he made kissing noises at her and ran off. She found out who the kid was and reported the incident to his vice principal who said... "we have to figure out how serious of a problem this really is". In the end, the kid was given a warning and nothing more. Or, kids are given repeated warnings for plagiarism, or skipping or showing up late or blatantly disrespecting the teacher. All of these behaviours, obviously, disrupt the learning of EVERYONE in the classroom and if they're not corrected, any sense of respect for authority is diminished. THESE are the types of behaviours that principals have become reluctant to deal with because parents either don't believe their kid is responsible or simply don't see the behaviour as a problem.

Now, I understand that you're not in a position to comment on that other than provide other anecdotes from a principal. Don't get me wrong either. There are principals who aren't scared of personal consequences and do an EXCELLENT job of managing their schools. All that I am saying is that it would be too much of a coincidence for this change to occur for some other reason at about the same time principals were removed from the teacher's unions.

He seems to think princ should suspend more. He doesnt run into much interference with parents when he presents the truth (and the proof). He also thinks there are some chickenshit princ's out there.

I dont think anyone doesnt believe your experience as an educator. I certainly believe what you have posted, as far as education goes that is.

Suspension isn't always the best tool. It's a great threat, but cannot be overused or it won't be respected. Unless of course we're talking in-school suspensions which are VERY undesirable... for everyone involved though.

It depends on the type of area in which you teach in terms of the interference from parents. The schools in poorer areas don't TYPICALLY have this problem but schools of wealthier students do. And it is these kids who often walk in the door with a sense of entitlement (leading to a lack of respect) that results in these less serious behaviours.

[guyser]

The number of members does matter each member's contribution to 'insurance' premiums is equal... meaning between principals and teachers. $1000/year x 5000 members provides 5 million a year for principals but $1000/year x 135000 provides 135 million a year for principals. If contributions to insurance are equal then the number of members does indeed matter. A given principal is FAR more likely to be named on a law suit than is a given teacher. (And I'm taking your word for it that this is the way different industries work. I can't think of what $1000/year/member from 135 000 members could be used for if not as insurance itself).

The numbers dont really matter since the assessed liability for each division in a school is different.

There would be on the face of it, less risk for a Principal than for a teacher. I would hazard a guess that teachers, being on the front lines, are at far greater risk with respect to liability suits.

After all, the teacher is the hands on person, and as such they would be the one who commited any alledged indiscretion.

Most of these would be categorized as liability for personal injury in a classroom. Pretty much everything else is outside the teachers control.

A Principal has a liability exposure for damages to a student under his direct care , not for injury in a classroom, although he may well be named in a suit.

A school board has liability imposed on them for numerous things. One being the physical property, the school itself , the driveways , walkways and equipment.

A slip and fall on ice does not come back to the teacher or the principal. That goes to the school board.

All three as mentioned have coverage via insurance paid for through premiums. Some "may have" a captive programme, but I doubt it.

As for what your $1 grand a year does?Good question and one you should ask your rep.I can say that.... The OTF building, staff, custodial staff, printed materials,Pro Devpmt stuff so on and so forth. Although for the life of me, $135 M goes a long way. I thought maybe the TPP was funded through this but that is not the case.

Pretty well every school board is repped by the Ont School Board Insurance Exchange. (OSBIE) They are the ones you call in the event of an injury, lawsuit , car accident and so forth.

[Kitch]

The numbers dont really matter since the assessed liability for each division in a school is different.

There would be on the face of it, less risk for a Principal than for a teacher. I would hazard a guess that teachers, being on the front lines, are at far greater risk with respect to liability suits.

After all, the teacher is the hands on person, and as such they would be the one who commited any alledged indiscretion.

Most of these would be categorized as liability for personal injury in a classroom. Pretty much everything else is outside the teachers control.

A Principal has a liability exposure for damages to a student under his direct care , not for injury in a classroom, although he may well be named in a suit.

A school board has liability imposed on them for numerous things. One being the physical property, the school itself , the driveways , walkways and equipment.

A slip and fall on ice does not come back to the teacher or the principal. That goes to the school board.

All three as mentioned have coverage via insurance paid for through premiums. Some "may have" a captive programme, but I doubt it.

As for what your $1 grand a year does?Good question and one you should ask your rep.I can say that.... The OTF building, staff, custodial staff, printed materials,Pro Devpmt stuff so on and so forth. Although for the life of me, $135 M goes a long way. I thought maybe the TPP was funded through this but that is not the case.

Pretty well every school board is repped by the Ont School Board Insurance Exchange. (OSBIE) They are the ones you call in the event of an injury, lawsuit , car accident and so forth.

Well, you've convinced me. Now I'm very curious though. Because there is a difference between liability for slipping on ice at school and the kinds of things you see in the 'blue pages' in the Professionally Speaking magazine. I'll look into it... somehow. And if you're interested, I'll let you know what I learn. (Including where that $135 M a year goes!)

I really can't think of another reason why principals are trigger shy these days either.

Good conversation... and sorry for being aggressive.

[guyser]

I'll look into it... somehow. And if you're interested, I'll let you know what I learn. (Including where that $135 M a year goes!)

I would be very interested. I cant think where half that money is going. $135M is one crapload of cash.I could see if that were the amount for the country, but this is only for Ontario.

I would bet a lot of fat cat salaries are in there.

Good conversation... and sorry for being aggressive.

No worries , I took it as passion, not aggression.

[Kitch]

I would be very interested. I cant think where half that money is going. $135M is one crapload of cash.I could see if that were the amount for the country, but this is only for Ontario.

Well, just from browsing through some of the federation websites I found this:

http://www.etfo.ca/BeingaMember/YourUnionD...es/default.aspx

It's just one of the teacher federations in Ontario and represents 57 693 teachers. Defense is only 19%.

I'm still looking though.

[Griz]

Those are indeed problems with our society. But schools have the ability to combat this, if not change it. But that ability has been taken away from schools, in Ontario at least.

I just read an article yesterday about Revenue Canada Agent making remarks about an Inuit artist. That is exactly what I mean--you can try and combat bullying in school but its meaningless when you have government officials acting like the school yard bully. I mean seriously--these people are suppose to be grown up. THATS WHATS WRONG WITH OUR SOCIETY! There kids will see this--and others and they'll just continue the childish cycle of the right wing mentality

[Community Advocate]

My concern is aimed at students who have nothing more than behavioural issues. The students who have the ability but choose to cause problems fpr their teachers and classmates.

Those would be the students who have not yet been diagnosed. There is always a reason for behaviour issues. Once their diagnoses has been confirmed by the medical professionals, the school will then take some of those diagnoses and re-name them "behaviour disorders" for their own puroses.

Lets face it, public schools have low standards. It is nothing more than an idealogy full of the warm and fuzzy. For example, in many elementary grades, students are given social passes. These students may have chosen not to work hard in their class, or are just plain lazy.

That is quite a generalization, Is it always the student's fault or the student that is lazy, or are there some lazy teachers as well? Are there any teachers not well educated in dealing with special needs in the classroom? Are there teachers who have more than their share of special needs students in a classroom? Are there any students in the classrooms who have not yet been, or may never be diagnosed? There are plenty.

However, they are moved on to the next grade without properly completing the previous grade. So what happens in the next year? They fall behind because they are unable to do the grade level required work. They end up taking up a majority of the teacher's time. Students who are there to learn suffer because the teacher is too busy dealing with students who act inappropriately or who fall behind because of the social pass.

This most certainly can not be blamed on the lazy or uninterested student, and the teacher must take some accountability and responsibility for this scenario. Things are the way they are because we set them up this way. This is how the public education system is set up now, mostly due to losing students after multiple failures.

Here is the problem with public schools. Instead of expecting students to strive and and fullfill high expectations, they are bringing all students down to a low level so that no one feels left out. This is a warm and fuzzy education. Sacrifice high expectations at the expense of the self esteem of a few.

This is called the 'dummy down' effect. It happens more in the states. Some people feel that special education students put on IEPs with accommodations and modifications do not belong in the public school system. Those folks may want to check into the number of IEPs in any particular school, and they would find there are high numbers. There is good reason for this. It is to help the individual child 'meet their own potential', as the square peg in the round hole, in great efforts to keep trying to squish them into the round holes. Short of going back to segregation, this will never end.

I had one student at each end of the spectrum. One aced his way through public education with honours all the way. He was focussed and didn't let anything get in his way of success. The other didn't make it past 9th grade.

Like you mentioned, a big problem is funding. Schools need more teachers. Combining grades in one classroom is wrong. My son was in a grade 3/4 split class. It was the worst experience of his young schooling life. I don't blame the teachers for this. They do what they are told to do by their provincial education departments. When I called the school district superintendent, all he told me was that research shows that split grade classrooms were beneficial and positive. I told him that there is always research that proves the point you want to support, and that his argument was weak. I found out later that year that he never set foot in my son's classroom, but yet he knew about this convincing research.

There is such research, and once again, the success of split classes not only depends on the teacher's ability to manage the classroom, but the particular make-up of the students in the class. Usually, the benefit is for the students in the lower grade of the split, but there are some benefits for the older group as well.

I know this may seem like a rant, but when it comes to the education of my kids, I get very involved, and right now, I am not liking what I see with the public education system

.

You have a choice to go private sector, to homeschool, or to roll up your sleeves, and get involved through your PAC, DPAC, BCCPAC, and your local school board.

[Community Advocate]

I'm wondering if it is possible to sue the parents of a problem child for depriving your own child of proper attention in the classroom? After all, if the problem child misbehaves he or she is the one taking resources away from the others.

Not in this lifetime on this earth. How do you think you could ever prove in a court of law that a child's behavior at school is the fault of a parent?

If the problem child misbehaves, it is the teacher's responsibility to intervene and manage the classroom. This statement reminds me of a parent who said at one of our meetings that special needs and behaviour disordered kids should not be admitted to schools, they don't belong there. I suppose she thought it would be best to leave them uneducated, roaming the neighbourhoods breaking into houses to relieve their boredom or something. I don't know where people get these 'holier than thou' ideas about other people's children, but the judgements and ignorant statements are unacceptable.

I realize that this is a very drastic step but if it were done in sufficient numbers I believe it would cause enough of a public outcry to force some more positive actions within the system.

The only positive outcry would be about human rights, and the right to public education regardless of a child's challenges or disabilities. What a can o worms that would open!

Actually, anything that gives good parents more power would be a positive step. The beauty of a voucher system is that it would allow parents to deprive bad schools of funding. This would also force changes.

Actually, more power does nothing for the parent, if the student has behaviour problems for which the causes have been undiagnosed, or if the student has been diagnosed as special needs.

Just some of my thoughts...

[Community Advocate]

I refuse to put my children in the public school system for just this reason. A lot of the kids are uncivilized and paints a clear picture of how their parents must be, a mess.

That is your choice. You are fortunate to be able to make that choice for your children. Some parents do not have this choice, and are stuck in the public education system, which is exactly why it exists.

I'm not talking about the odd fight, boys will be boys after all. I draw the line when 10 year olds are stabbing each other. That is not ok and obviously a problem from their home with the parenting or lack thereof.

Can you say mental illness? Bi Polar? Autistic? Fetal Alcohol Syndrome? (that's only a few)

There are a whole host of mental illnesses and disorders that children are faced with today. Many of them are labelled 'brats' and are never properly diagnosed. Some of those end up incarcerated. Many more end up addicts.

Thank goodness for many who use the public system that these brats are mostly in the inner cities and away from where the civilized people live.

This is quite an ignorant statement. Name calling children is never acceptable, 'brat', 'loser' whatever your choice of negative words. Especially for those whom you do not know anything about. You call yourself a 'civilized person', yet you express yourself in this way?

Children with learning disabilities, mental illnesses and disorders are in every school in every school district in every province.

That plus I don't want my children brainwashed 8 hours a day by some socialist.

Another ignorant statement. They are only at school in session for less than five hours per day for starters, and count the number of teachers through the K-12 years, and you'll be hard pressed to charge them all with being brainwashing socialists!

[Community Advocate]

No, but as a teacher you may be too close to the problem to have a clear perspective. You have to struggle with it every working day. It's like with cops, how as the years go by they tend to socialize only with other cops. It's part of being human.

Teachers only associate with other teachers? I've never heard that one before! I think teachers are in a good position (working in the system) to have a clear perspective from their own point of view. It's how we listen (or not) to them that makes the difference.

As for suing the parents of problem children, why do you pooh-pooh the idea? Consider, a citizen pays his taxes expecting that part of the deal is a good education for his children. If the schools do not fulfill their part of the bargain and the political process seems paralyzed, is a parent not entitled to redress?

I pooh-pooh the idea because it is not even close to realistic.

If a child breaks a neighbour's window, it is expected that the parents are obligated to pay for the damage. How is this different if an unruly child takes time and resources away from others in the classroom?

It is different because it is public education. It is not the child's fault, nor the parent's fault if the school can not manage their resources with the students they have, it is the fault of the school system, budgets, and administrators.

As a parent of two children myself, my primary concern is their safety and education. That of other children is secondary. That of problem children, particularly those who have parents that aren't fulfilling their own responsibilities is even farther down the list. I'm not against those children with special needs being cared for, just that I don't believe that they are entitled to take away from other children.

They have the same right to education that your children have. Farther down your list of concerns is children who have parents who aren't ufilling their own responsibilities? That statement smacks of judgement, and lacks empathy and understanding.

I believe that if the State takes the taxes then they take the responsibility, period! If they don't live up to it then the first step is political grievance. If that fails then anything that works is fair game! If getting lawyers involved works then at least that is a far more responsible step than marching into a school board meeting and "going postal"!

Getting lawyers involved will not work. Talk to your Minister of Education and let that sector know of the shortfalls in supporting special needs in this province. Then, you'll be a part of the solution for the teachers, the special needs students, and the 'good' students who care about their education.

If it ruffles some feathers, who cares? Again, the primary interest is that of the civilized child and their education. Everything else is secondary. Anything that doesn't work is a negative and whatever DOES work is a positive!

The suggestion to sue parents of special needs kids for taking away from 'civilized' students shows you do not care. The civilized child is the primary interest and everything else is secondary? This speaks volumes about your paradigm.

I personally have seen bullying issues going on at my children's elementary school where the bully is just given anger management session after session, while he continues to prey on victims! When one poor little boy finally out of desperation fought back, HE was punished!

In effect, he was made a victim twice! He received a very negative lesson, that authority figures will NOT protect him! No child should ever be made to believe such a thing.His parents eventually had to put him into another school. Meanwhile, the bully is still there, taking more sessions, with his very own EA to cater to him.

11

In one case at our elementary school, the poor little boy who fought back was told to do so by his school principal, who then expelled him for the action he took, as suggested. Twice victimized is very rare. Usually, one who is the target of bullying is victimized over and over again throughout their school years. My son had this experience as well. What did I do? I rallied other parents in our school district, had them fill in my survey, write victim impact statements, met for six weeks over my kitchen table with nine other parents, and we delegated to the school board. The result? An anti-harassment policy WRITTEN for students, (similar to those teachers have), a district wide mandatory education program for all administrators, teachers, and open to parents, and training sessions for school staff and administrators, along with a 'blue sheet' reporting system whereby all incidents must be recorded. I also fundraised to get anti-bullying groups into the elementary schools. My son learned by my role modelling that authority figures will protect him, and will ensure that he was heard. He also learned that parents can make a difference for all kids in the school, and that if we see something not working well, we can be a part of the problem by standing by and watching, or we can be a part of the solution by taking action.

Had that parent had the means and support to address the issue with the school board, they may have been able to find a different solution. But they were right to move their child to another school if it was deemed he was not safe.

Suing other parents for the behaviour problems their children display in the classroom is far from a solution IMO, and completely unachieveable.

If it had have been one of MY children involved, I'm afraid I would not have been nearly so mild about trying for a solution. As I said, my first responsibility is to my own children. I would take callous and bureaucratic disregard for my child's welfare quite personally.

As most of us would. Perhaps you can share your idea of exactly what steps you would take if one of your children were involved? I'm quite curious.

[Community Advocate]

We need to separate the students who need more help from the smart ones before it gets to High School so the smart students aren't waiting around while the teacher stops the entire class to explain something to the simpleton for the 10th time.

Keep those slow kids separate from the rest of them. Not everyone is equal and the sooner the kids learn that the better of they'll be. Coddling them just makes them weak and ill prepared for the real world.

Can you say segregation?

[Mr.Canada]

Can you say segregation?

Not everyone is equal in terms of intelligence. Nothing wrong with that.

We should be encouraging bright people not dumbing them down so everyone can "feel" good.

[Kitch]

This most certainly can not be blamed on the lazy or uninterested student, and the teacher must take some accountability and responsibility for this scenario. Things are the way they are because we set them up this way. This is how the public education system is set up now, mostly due to losing students after multiple failures.

You're right, this cannot be blamed on the students and this IS the way public education is set up. And teachers are held accountable for failures of students AND the amount of time that they must spend managing their classes.

Some teachers don't know how to effectively manage classrooms. They don't know how to prevent/limit the circumstances that lead to behaviour problems and so have more than their share to deal with. Sure, these teachers should be held accountable (how do you do that though... just asking).

But this is only a narrow view of the problem... that problem being students who are given the 'social pass'. This is indeed how it is set up, by the government (in Ontario... I can't speak for other provinces).

When Mike Harris became premier, he made some huge changes to education. He changed the funding model and cut a lot of funding, leaving schools to find ways to proceed without resources. Well, when McGuinty came to be our new premier, he and his party made further changes. He didn't reverse anything that Harris did, as some people may have you believe, he made different changes. He did pump more money into public education, but not for schools... he didn't change Harris' funding model, meaning that schools still have less money than they had to work with in the early 90's. He introduced standardized testing and the Ontario College of Teachers (maybe Harris did this, I don't know).

The organization responsible for implementing the standardized testing, EQAO, is an arm's length group of the Ministry of Education. And what do they do? They rank our students (and schools) with regard to literacy and numeracy. The public isn't supposed to use these rankings, but as we know, they are published in the news every year. The idea was that if a school was found to be producing students that are below the provincial "standard", then attention was to be paid to that school. Unfortunately, that attention was not in the form of additional resources... to be honest, other than the negative attention paid to these schools by the media, and therefore the public, I don't know what poor scoring schools got! But I do know that enrolment at these schools is likely to go down leading to further decreases in funding (I believe).

The second change in the Ministry of Education was the OCT, which was designed to make teaching a self-governing profession (euphemism), which really meant holding teachers MORE accountable for the success of their students. This is not a bad idea, but it has been taken too far. I believe that the perception of teachers in our province has become more negative than it was before Harris. When a teacher called home to inform a parent that, say, their child was showing up to class late every day, then that parent would likely listen to the teacher and the behaviour of the student might change. Well, now, to give you an example, I know two teachers who have called a parent to tell them that their child is late every day. The response? "My son/daughter just likes to sleep in". Hmmm. And then when THAT same students fails a test, the teacher is the one who is held accountable?

The government created this environment (whether intentional or not) which makes the public happy because 1. they're looking out for the success of the kids in Ontario, as seen by the amount of standardized testing, and 2. because teachers are more accountable for the success of the children of Ontario. (Not to mention that the definition of success is a certain grade or passing a credit.... no longer is it defined by the amount of LEARNING that occurs!). So parents out there are happy because the government is on their side, trying to get those lazy teachers to do their job. And now we have rules that say we HAVE to accept late assignments and are not allowed to give zeros to kids who hand work in months late. So while education keeps getting worse because kids are not taught any form of responsibility and are not held accountable for THEIR actions, the government keeps getting re-elected on these policies that are designed for nothing more than getting re-elected... NOT to better the education of our students.

[Griz]

Generation-X is here--the spoiled rotten generation who don't want to do the work but get good grades because mommy and daddy tells the principal to override the teachers grade because spoiled rotten little johnny --in the parents mind--isn't a total shit disturber in class but an A student so little johnny can get scholarships to go through school. Now that little Johnny is in post-secondary he can't write worth crap but society says hes a good little johnny because mommy and daddy the tax payer says so. What happens? Bridges collapse....people run for VP who know diddly squat,..etc. How do some of the people in our society get some of their jobs and why are they doing them when they know diddly--that's the problem with our society--Generation X is spoiled rotten and have no respect

[guyser]

Generation-X is here--the spoiled rotten generation who don't want to do the work but get good grades because mommy and daddy tells the principal to override the teachers grade because spoiled rotten little johnny --in the parents mind--isn't a total shit disturber in class but an A student so little johnny can get scholarships to go through school.

I suspect every generation has heard this diatribe. Wasnt true then, isnt true now.