Agreed and that is after a lot of years of life and about 50 years directly and indirectly involved in education (as well as variety of other experiences). For the critics of “government education” one of the roots of the problems in “government education” is requirement to try to serve every person–whether disabled (or whatever PC terms are acceptable) or interested or not. There are people (in every aspect of life) who are not interested in doing what most of society considers “correct”. As a classroom teacher have worked with situations of very difficult to work with students (whether ability or attitude) and with parents who cared and those who may even have been encouraging their child in problems that disrupted everyone. Yes a major “problem” with “government education” is that society has determined that it shall seek to serve everyone and also has in place serious restrictions against your proposal of three strikes and out–check out what it takes to even dismiss a student from a particular classroom. But, for the critics would still contend that society has not been wrong in seeking to provide education for the masses.

I'd expect this kind of post from your morning demesis Dave, Abdul. But not from a learned lawyer. (By the way, he was on a roll this morning, and your brilliantly cut him off with the “done in IPS” reference. Priceless and highly explanatory–he's what, 50 years old? So, maybe IPS's problemls are decades old, huh?)

You are aware, aren't you, that public schools are required by law to educate all kids to a certain age? And, statutes require, that if you suspend or boot one of those eligible students, alternative programs are provided at no cost to the student. Sometimes alernatives are in another building, sometimes at home online, whatever. All monitored by public school personnel and supervised by the IDOE.

The underlying premise is: we have a societal responsibility to all these kids, even the trouble-makers, to a certain age. I whole-heartedly agree with that. No civilized society in history has ever turned its back on kids.

Now, 14-year-old chronic trouble-makers: well, we need a better way to deal with them. Some of them are kids only in title: many are bigger than most adults. But they cannot stifle the education my kids receive. That balance is delicate, and some districts do OK with it. Alas, IPS is not one of those districts.

You probably know I'm not a huge fan of Matt Tully. I think he's a lazy writer and researcher, which is a shame, given the full plate of opportunity he has. But his Manual HS series was borderline brilliant. Go back and re-read it. He saw first-hand how the problem you've outlined, is dealt with in the day-to-day life of an urban public high school. Some hits, some misses and a lot of tries.

I celebrate the tries. We've got to find different ways ot try harder and more often. A lot of these kids have salvage written all over them, if they click with the right program or teacher.

On this issue TA, Abdul & I would be more demebros…

Is everyone worth saving? Yes, everyone is worth saving. Unfortunately that is not the question. Can we save everyone? No. Should we allow a small number of troublemakers to negatively impact the education of everyone else? No. Since we have limited resources to devote to education, should those resources be given to troublemakers at the cost of having fewer resources for those that seem to value their education? Again, no.

Here is what I think we can do not only for the trouble makers but for everyone.

1. Increase emphasis on vocational education. Right now a lot of kids know they won't be going to college and don't see the need to “waste” their time in school. If that school was going to help teach them a trade that could increase the amount of money they could expect to earn there would be more incentive to stay in school. And motivated students tend to behave better.

2. Hold parents accountable. If a child is often absent or mis-behaving, require parents to come to the school and explain why. If a parent can not or will not force the child to behave – take the child from the parent. I know that sounds harsh – but a child only has one shot at an education. He or she should not be robbed of it by a bad parent. Allowing a child to throw away their education is child abuse – and should be treated as such.

3. Don't allow children that are not in good standing at school to work or drive. Parents should be doing this anyway – but in case they aren't – make it the law.

4. Create small specialized schools specifically to deal with behavior problems. If a child cannot behave in a normal school, send that child to the smaller school. Have teachers specifically trained to deal with kids with behavior problems. Just as importantly – get the trouble makers out of the regular school where they are disrupting everyone else's education.

No child really deserves a dumbed down government education complete with history books that spin the truth. I think every child deserves a private education at a school that delivers better quality education for a lower cost.

To the credit of my government education, I did learn to read, write, and type. I did not learn history, philosophy, or literature. They failed to teach me how to think. I learned that after I graduated.

I think Dobie covers the topic well. I also suggest putting citizens before non-citizens in reduced infrastructure spending, including education and medical care. We should also optomize schools by retaining the best teachers, have the money follow the child, and demand greater simplicity and transparency (per the recent school funding roundtable).

Agman,
I do have some experience with religious school applications. My sons had teachers in high school that allowed for the free flow of information, questioned the “church” regarding their history, debated abortion, discussed the normal teenage questions (sex, drugs, life) and most of all, the kids knew when they were being fed a bunch of BS, just like in “real” schools. If you have further direct questions, I'll be honest and happily answer them.
Thanks,
PB

And yes, everyone is worth saving. When you build positive relationships, you would be surprised who you can reach.

Government's highest & only utility is protecting people. Salvation is not the purview of government; nor is education.

The human race doesn't require the force of government “organizing;” which unnerves statists, uncomfortable with the “anarchy” of self determination or individual sovereignty.

It's natural that people want things for themselves, but it's unnatural when they expect those things from others. The needs & wants of one are not a legitimate mortgage on the life of another (time, resources, etc.). Contracting others or the government to steal from some & give to others, is not legitimate employment- it's immoral.

Government's not an answer, it's the problem. The evidence to support that claim is overwhelming.

“Knowledge and learning, generally diffused throughout a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government; it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to encourage, by all suitable means, moral, intellectual, scientific, and agricultural improvement; and to provide, by law, for a general and uniform system of Common Schools, wherein tuition shall be without charge, and equally open to all.” — Article 8 Section 1

There is no language present above, or anywhere in Article 8 (Education) that mandates compulsory education.

“For the critics of “government education” one of the roots of the problems in “government education” is requirement to try to serve every person–whether disabled (or whatever PC terms are acceptable) or interested or not.” — agman

I'ts been said that the Constitution mandates that public schools cannot turn anyone away. This is somewhat accurate. A more accurate statement would be that the public schools are “equally open to all.”

All that this means is that public schools cannot turn anyone away THAT WANTS AN EDUCATION.

Any so-called requirement that public schools must take everyone is an artificial requirement created by those elected reprobates on the General ASSembly.

As an aside…I listened while Abdul cut 'Crazy Larry' off, then poked fun at his grammar.

I want to know if Abdul will also poke fun at Olgen Williams the next time he is interviewed?

“
You are aware, aren't you, that public schools are required by law to educate all kids to a certain age? And, statutes require, that if you suspend or boot one of those eligible students, alternative programs are provided at no cost to the student.” – Think Again.

Swell….as long as it's understood that this requirement was artificially created by the General ASSembly; there is no compulsory requirement in Article 8. Thus, those reprobates could easily change the 'law' at will.

Goverment certainly has no problem taking children away from parents. Place these 'trouble-makers' into a Boot Camp-style experience, where the instructors have the ability and authority to discipline these little darlings.

They could live in Quonset Huts, attend class in a bare-bones building, and when not in class, they could be working the fields, learning a trade, whatever. They need to spend at least one semester in this environment…then released on some sort of 'probation'.

“At what point does a student(who is not yet 18 and thus not legally treated as an adult) forfeit his/her right to a free education?” — mike_dp

They have a right to attend school without tuition…not a 'free education'. Also, they must WANT to learn. There is NO Constitutional-requirement that public schools must KEEP every kid in their clutches. Again, this is an artificial requirement by those buffoons in the General ASSembly.

“The current law of the land is No Child Left Behind…”

What jurisdiction does the federal government use to coerce schools into doing what they (feds) want, or inflicting these so-called federal education 'laws' upon the States?

IA makes a good point. That language reads, not as compulsory, but a minimal standard of last resort ACCESS. Similar to minimal standards of compassion, to house folks, temporarily in county homes, etc; not force a counterfeit standards on the general population, bloated beyond purpose in an abuse of public trust, to corruptly fund, a false economy of programatic, adult day care.

We are living in a world that doesn't know what it wants from education. We want holistic results on a standardized test-based curriculum. Schools are sent so many mixed messages. This is not a cop-out. It's the truth.

Case-in-point, the Governor wants to hold students back that can't read by the third grade. Yet, the funding reality says that many districts need to reduce staffing. So, you're going to end up, in many urban/suburban/rural school districts with a third grade full of kids that can't get to the fourth grade. How do you fund that?

We want world class schools, but we fund them like third world schools. We want world class teachers, but we call them greedy money grubbers. We want all students to succeed, but we pull resources away from the schools that most need them.

Mixed messages!!

Look at the avatar of this site's #5 commentor, Matthew Stone. It contains a rap artist's message: “IMA LET U FINISH”

What else do you want to know about the problems with education in this country?

Hector, I am referering to her articles when she was an editor with the Indianapolis Star. She had a long series of thoughtful and informative editorials-but, I don't know where to send you to read them. Facts are, a lot of 3rd graders don't know how to read. It would not be politically correct to state, for the record, that many kids in that group don't have the IQ to be able to read-they are stupid through no fault of their own, howeve, another great % of those unable to read are victims of IU, BSU, PU, and other places of applied stupidity in the teaching of how to teach reading. The Neal columns shed a lot of light on why socialism does not work, cannot work, will not work and the conspiracy against the public that government schools have become.
I don't think Andrea references her teaching experience in these columns and it does not seem relevant to the discussion. To dismiss ten or fifteen Indianapolis Star columns on the basis of irrelevant experiences certainly isn't a wise course of action. But, I don't know where to send you to pick up the threads of that conversation.
I think I can assure you on the basis of my experience in government schools that had you those columns your opinion expressed would be much different and closer to the truth.

“Aires–your Constitutional rants are getting old. By your strict and literal interpretation, the General Assembly could never, ever write statutes to enforce Constitutional mandates.” – Think Again

TA, you are wrong. But, I'm curious….what part of the Constitution don't you like? Clearly, parts of the Constitution bother you, as you make reference to my “strict and literal interpretation” of the document.

How would you interpret it? Do you change the meaning as it suits you? Do you add or detract words that don't exist in the original text?

You are aware that even our Indiana courts repeatedly state that each word of our Constitution has meaning, and is hammered into the instrument?

If the provisions of the Constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned.

Simply because you don't like our Constitution will not cause me to cease quoting it.

But, holding our Constitution in such disdain places you in good company with LIEyers, other scoundrels and politicians.

Pascal, are you a teacher?

Jon-do the same homework assigned to Hector and then you will both come up to speed and have some more solid ground on which to base your opijnions. Yes, I teach. Right on this site I teach people where their thinking has gone bad. TA, for instance, has enriched Haiti for every error of his exposed (presumably). Socrates was a thought doctor.
As to the urban school myths I've spent 9 years as an elected school board member and am familiar with nearly all of the lies and myths of government schools. My library of education materials is quite extensive.
I think I could teach a kid to read but I also think that I pay others to accomplish that task and they don't accomplish that task. Where should I go to get a refund for the wasted tax dollars? With so many 3rd graders in Indiana being unable to read what is your preferred excuse for this glaring and historical failure (it has been going on for decades and decades)?
If the little kids don't have the IQ to be able to be taught reading then let's get that out on the table and discuss how to handle that problem. If the teachers don't have a clue as to how to teach reading using the billions of dollars of research wasted on the science of reading then let's replace the administrators who have no clue in the schools of mis-education and require their graduates to remediate themselves. If you have better ideas, have at it.

And you would have more knowledge and potential ability if you did the assigned homework. Consider that all public school teachers think they know how to be excellent teachers yet a huge % of kids they teach can't read. Teachers look around and around and ignore that particular elephant in the room and say, “Who, us?” You don't say if you are in the K-3 track where the unenlightened would look to assign responsibility for reading failure but you don't provide any better ideas either. You want more money for schools and for yourself. I can understand that and we have done that but we have seen no improvement in education-read the report and deny to this audience that taxpayers overpay teachers currently for the results said teachers achieve. Tell us again why government schools don't, can't, won't teach kids to read and what teachers are going to do about it-given, of course, your 13 years of experience and examination, for 13 years, of X % of kids in your classroom who could not read.

9 years on a school board is not sniping….it is being in the belly of the beast. Google up the March 13 headline of the South Bend Tribune for “What we have done…isn't working”. Read the report with which this thread began and consider that all those things you mentioned are not working either.
Andrea Neal addresses the reading instruction of Indiana's schools of miseducation. You pooh poo her and so remain as ignorant as a tree instead of learning about what is, in Indiana, a systemic failure. No one is asking government schools to do much, after all, this chest pounding about graduation rates is only over a dumbed down 9th grade level exit exam which makes our high school diploma equal to an 8th grade level education.
Hard to achieve that if a very substantial portion of the kids cannot read at the 3rd grade level. There are reasons why kids are not taught how to read-see Neal-you know where she works and I agree with most of what she has reported.
“The question, I guess, is what do we want the schools to do?” In a way it doesn't matter because socialist models don't perform because they cannot perform and won't perform. In Indiana, $.50 from every dollar of taxes feeds this socialist bloat of good people trapped in bad systems.
If we cannot achieve what parents want (roughly the 3 r's) then why pay so much for so little? Mere housewives can teach school for a whole lot less and get equally unimpressive results…or maybe better if left to their own methods.
People are losing their homes because of high taxes.