Posts by urbantinker8

Larry Walker24 said:but even high school graduation isn't a level playing field because not every school has the same standards

and since everyone was complaining about the honors student flood, MIT fixed the whole mess by adding entrance exams; the results? A total disaster

and I suppose it’s pretty much the same deal here.
it seems like whenever things go sideways, the media just frames it so that either the teachers are entirely to blame or they get all the credit for the results, and that’s basically how it ends.🙄

Everything checks out.
Which is why I keep saying this whole thing is just a run-of-the-mill—albeit pricey—farce.
It’s not that I have anything against getting an outside perspective or some third-party evaluation.
But I really can't get behind this kind of tragicomedy that the entire situation has devolved into.☕

Susan James said:It’s not like they have to be geniuses, and not everyone who nails advanced math chooses to go into liberal arts or pure sciences (by the way, you need advanced math for psychology too).

I’m not expecting a perfect score on the SAT or anything, but if someone wants to become a teacher—someone whose whole job is laying the educational foundation for kids—and they choose the easier math track, I think that’s a real disservice to the teaching profession.

Computer science will probably end up being taught by theology majors with a minor in IT. 🥳 🙂

Not really.
I mean, I suspect the baseline requirement will probably just be knowing how to turn on a laptop and browse the web, mostly because finding anyone truly qualified who actually wants to apply for these positions seems unlikely.🕺

Actually, this feels like a bit of an open invitation to all those people constantly criticizing the school system—why not just put your names in for these openings and actually contribute something useful to the curriculum reform?😍
The pay is supposedly great, and the benefits are even better, so...👍
I don't know, who could possibly say no to that?🙂

wanderingbadger44 said:Look, I honestly don't get why someone who's already crushed advanced calculus would even consider enrolling at Teachers College. You really have to think about it.

And just wait until you see the absolute chaos of who they’ll actually be hiring to teach computer science once it becomes a mandatory subject. 😬

I am honestly just sitting here, waiting for the inevitable fallout.
The very moment this was first brought up, I had this nagging feeling that the whole thing was basically doomed from the start.
And, I don't know, I guess I just don't quite grasp how the average person falls for these blatant political stunts that seem designed solely to score some cheap points with voters.

Where are the actual professionals???
Where is the hardware???

Even if they somehow managed to set aside significant funding to outfit schools—which, let's be honest, probably won't happen—who exactly do they think is going to step up to teach this from elementary school all the way through the end of high school?

I guess I should probably start by saying that I don't really have a strong opinion on this, though I suppose I could try to find one if it helps the conversation move along, which maybe it won't. It feels like we’re all just circling the same drain, isn't it? I was thinking about it earlier—well, more like staring at a blank screen while my coffee went cold—and I realized how much we tend to overcomplicate things when the answer is usually right there, buried under all the noise. It’s a bit like trying to read a book in a crowded subway station during rush hour; you know the words are there somewhere, but there's just too much going on around you to actually focus. Anyway, I don't mean to ramble, but I think there's something worth noting here about how we approach these discussions in general. Maybe I'm just being overly cautious, or perhaps I'm just tired, but I suspect we could all stand to slow down a little bit.

nimblelynx7 I guess I should probably mention that... So, let me guess—when the national standardized test scores come in looking pretty rough, we’re just supposed to point the finger at the students?

This might sound a bit paradoxical, I suppose, but there’s just something about the way DM handles things that feels... I don't know, slightly unrealistic to me. These results seem almost too good to be true, I guess. Maybe I'm just being overly cautious, but there’s something about how everything is lining up that feels a bit surreal, if you know what I mean. It's one of those situations where you find yourself squinting at the data, wondering if you missed a decimal point somewhere or if the stars just happened to align perfectly for once. I don't want to sound cynical, because I really don't, but when things look this polished, a part of me always waits for the other shoe to drop. It’s just an odd feeling, I suppose..😉

wanderingbadger44 said:What’s actually wrong with the SATs? Aside from students getting decent scores? Or the fact that those scores barely impact college admissions nowadays? (And neither of those points is really a failure of the testing system itself.)

The national standardized tests are easily the most honest, transparent, and professional thing this messy government manages to pull off.

Can you seriously not tell from the quote provided that Judith's ring was red? Did you miss the part in Hemingway's passage where it asks if the woman died from a high fever? Honestly, someone needs to check your work—you clearly didn't earn that A in English class.

I suppose you could argue that the DM was originally conceived as the most honest and unbiased way to handle grading, though I guess there’s always room for debate on how much objectivity actually exists in any system.
But then again, I suppose she failed on quite a few different levels, if you really think about it.
I guess I was just sitting here wondering about what the actual cutoff is for passing... you know, that specific percentage you need to hit to actually clear the hurdle. It’s funny how much weight those numbers carry, isn't it? One minute you're cruising along, and the next you're staring at a grade and trying to figure out if you actually made the cut or if you're just hovering in that gray area. I suppose it really depends on the specific course or whatever institution you're dealing with, but I was just thinking about that threshold.🤦
I’ve been looking over some of the exam questions from my courses at both the undergraduate and graduate levels lately—honestly, they're just kind of ridiculous.🤦
I suppose there’s this strange, lingering sense of an imbalance between levels, if that makes any sense. It feels like things just aren't quite leveling out where they should be, though I might be overthinking it, or maybe I'm just seeing patterns where none exist. It’s hard to say, really. There's this gap, this sort of disproportionate spread between one tier and the next, and I can't help but wonder if it's intentional or just some byproduct of how everything is structured. It’s a bit unsettling, I guess, seeing that disparity sitting there, staring back at you.
I was looking back at some of the old data recently, and I couldn't help but notice this strange, nagging imbalance in how the difficulty of the tests seems to shift from one year to the next. It’s hard to pin down exactly why, but there's definitely a noticeable discrepancy in the weight and rigor of certain years compared to others, which feels a bit off, I guess. Maybe it’s just a fluke in the grading curves or perhaps the curriculum underwent some subtle shifts we didn't account for, but the inconsistency is certainly there if you look closely enough.
It’s funny how you occasionally stumble upon that strange sense of disproportion between certain related objects, I guess. You look at them side by side and there's just this inherent mismatch in scale or proportion that feels slightly off, though maybe it's just my own perception acting up. It's one of those subtle things that catches your eye when you aren't really looking for it, an imbalance that doesn't quite make sense given how they ought to relate to one another.
The whole setup—you know, the logistics, how everything is organized, and all those numbers floating around in the game... it’s quite a bit to wrap your head around, I guess. It feels like there's this massive, complex machinery running behind the scenes, almost like trying to map out the entire supply chain at a place like Amazon or managing the sheer scale of a FedEx operation, where every little moving part has to sync up perfectly just to keep things from falling apart. There’s a certain weight to the way the amounts are balanced, too, which makes you wonder if the developers spent more time on the spreadsheets than the actual gameplay, though maybe that's just my cynical take on it. It's a lot to process all at once, really.🤦
I suppose I’ve been thinking quite a bit lately about those little interrogative words—you know, the ones we use to build questions—and how they sort of act as the scaffolding for everything we try to figure out in a conversation. It’s funny, really, how much weight a single word like "who" or "why" carries when you're trying to peel back the layers of a situation, though I guess it’s easy to take them for granted since they're just such a fundamental part of how we navigate the world. There’s a certain rhythm to them, a way they prompt us to pause and consider things from a different angle, even if the answers don't always turn out to be what we were looking for in the first place. Maybe it's just me being overly analytical, but I find there's a quiet sort of complexity in the way these question-starters function, almost like they're setting the stage before the actual inquiry even begins.

And then, after everything that’s happened, I guess you could say that a DM isn't even the most important factor when it comes to getting into college.

I don’t know, I guess I just find the whole thing to be a bit of a farce, if I'm being honest.☕

William Cooper11 said:Parents would start asking some very tough questions about what their kids actually know if we implemented standardized testing or continuous external evaluations throughout all eight years of elementary school. The real question is, who stands to lose the most from that kind of transparency?

Honestly, after seeing how this current state-mandated graduation exam turned out, I think we should just pray to God we never have to deal with any more "standardized testing" like this again.🤦

nimblelynx7 said:Why on earth is that the case?

Just go ahead and ask them.

Karen Richardson3 said:Schools try to cram everything under the sun into kids' heads, but honestly, most of it just evaporates. It's because they don't care, or maybe they just can't wrap their brains around it. Do you seriously believe that teaching "more intense" lessons on compound interest is going to stop people from living way beyond their means, taking on bad debt, making reckless financial choices, or somehow bringing peace to the world? 😁

The fundamental flaw in our education system and the country at large isn't actually that low-performers fail to learn interest rates. It's that the whole system coddles them; we're afraid to call things what they are. The entire structure is built with the bottom tier as the priority, leaving all those high-achieving kids and driven individuals with no choice but to leave the country if they want a top-tier education or a career where you actually move up based on merit.

And that’s honestly one of the reasons why the USA remains a superpower. Over there, they don't hand out participation trophies to everyone, and frankly, nobody cares if some person doesn't know how interest works or lacks health insurance—instead, they focus on importing the absolute best talent from every other corner of the globe.

Grades are the absolute North Star of our school system; everything revolves around them, and they basically dictate a student's entire future. Nobody actually gives a damn about true knowledge or deep comprehension. Like I always say, cram it all in today, recite it tomorrow, forget it by the day after, and in three days, nobody will ever ask you about it again. They'll just move on to the next topic, and you'll just have to repeat the same cycle.

You could also look at it from a different angle:
- some kids/people are only capable of rote memorization, while others are capable of actual understanding. That leaves us with four main groups: the ones who are clueless and don't study at all, the ones who are clueless but can memorize things, the smart ones who don't bother studying (but understand enough to get an A), and finally, the smart ones who actually study (meaning they both understand the concepts and retain the necessary data).
You're clearly an idealist, so I guess you believe everyone has the capacity to truly understand, but personally, I think that's pretty far from reality. Because of that, you and I are probably never going to see eye-to-eye on how to fix the school system. 😁

Besides, I don't see anything wrong with learning something and then forgetting it shortly after. The brain just needs to have encountered that information once; that way, if you ever need it again down the road, you'll at least have a fighting chance to find it and figure it out.

you hit the nail on the head🙏

nimblelynx7 I suppose I should mention that...
It all seems to be written based on their own personal whims, I suppose. The curriculum and the whole general roadmap haven't really seen a single meaningful change in twenty years, yet suddenly everything is being treated like some sort of radical revolution just because I finally graduated—give me a break.

And you're supposed to be the yardstick... for what, exactly...? I guess it’s hard to say, really. Maybe there's a point to it, or maybe we're all just spinning our wheels here, though I suppose that’s more of an observation than a question. It feels like we're grasping at shadows sometimes, doesn't it? I mean, if you're acting as the standard, one has to wonder what the metric actually is, but then again, I might just be overthinking the whole thing.🤷

I guess if I look back at my own high school days, maybe around ten percent of the students ended up heading off to specialized business academies or vocational schools focused on economics.

Well, I guess you were the one who said it first—that it all happened a long time ago. It’s been twenty years, I suppose. Just sitting here thinking about how much time has actually slipped through my fingers since everything started. It feels like a lifetime ago, yet somehow also like it was only yesterday, if that makes any sense. Twenty years is a long stretch, really quite a significant chunk of a person's life, and looking back at where things stood then compared to now... well, it's a lot to process. I guess we just drift along, don't we? One day you're marking one milestone, and the next, two decades have vanished into thin air. Maybe it doesn't even matter how you count it..☕

I’ve always felt that grades are probably the most significant thing in our entire education system, and honestly, everything seems to revolve around them; they dictate a student's whole future, while nobody really seems to care about actual knowledge or deep understanding. It's kind of like what I always say—you just cram everything into your head today, recite it back perfectly tomorrow, and then by the day after, you've completely forgotten it all, and I guess in three days, no one is ever going to ask you about it again. They'll just move on to some other topic, and you'll find yourself just repeating the exact same cycle over and over.

And you’re still basing everything on your own experiences from twenty years ago...? I guess that’s one way to look at it, though maybe it’s a bit outdated, isn't it?🕺

I suppose you wouldn't want to spend too much time collaborating with people who might not exactly possess the sharpest analytical tools, right? It seems like a bit of a stretch to take experiences from working with those types of individuals and then try to spin them into universal truths that don't really hold any water. I mean, maybe it happens, but it feels like a flawed way to look at things, if you ask me.
I suppose, if I’m being honest, grades tend to become this massive, looming priority for parents—which, by extension, puts an incredible amount of pressure on the kids themselves, too. It feels like everything just centers around that GPA or whether a student is hitting certain benchmarks, almost as if those numbers are the only thing that truly matters in the grand scheme of things. Maybe it’s just how we’ve been conditioned to view success here in the States, but it seems like parents often get caught up in the metrics, perhaps unintentionally creating this heavy atmosphere where a child's worth is tied directly to their report card.
I suppose, if you look at it from the perspective of the teachers, those grades are really just nothing more than a single numerical value used to quantify knowledge, purely for the sake of providing some kind of feedback to the parents.
I suppose it’s worth mentioning that the grading rubrics in every single school, regardless of the subject matter, are worked out down to the smallest possible detail; it's all laid out so clearly that you can see exactly what you need to master—and just how much of it you actually need to know—to land a specific grade.
If you take a moment to do a little digging online, I guess you’ll eventually find that there isn't really any mention of specific definitions or rote memorization being required, especially when it comes to those top-tier grades that go beyond just meeting the basic requirements.☕

Richard Perez3 said:But check out these crazy ideas coming out of Paris—they think giving lower grades punishes you, when really, it just reflects how much you don't know.
God forbid anyone actually thinks a grade is just a measure of knowledge.
Oh, you don't want your ignorance graded? Please. It isn't even "grading" ignorance, for crying out loud; if they were actually grading how little people knew, these folks would have finished five years of college by now.

🤣
whatever.
maybe ignorance should be rewarded too, since who has ever actually seen someone get "punished" for anything before.😲

Sarah Hall53 said:So, I spent seven years teaching foreign languages at the elementary level, and honestly, I used to complain all the time about how I shouldn't even be handing out grades until third grade—and my reasoning was pretty much identical to what’s being said here.
I mean, look, by the end of the school year, about 90% of my kids would have mastered those 200 core words and 25 basic phrases. The only outliers were kids who needed special education services or, you know, children dealing with serious neglect at home. So, does it really matter if little Johnny masters everything required by the curriculum in January, April, or May? When I do grade, I’m measuring exactly that—just the speed at which a child picks up the material.
It’s a similar story in English Language Arts and Math, from what I’ve observed—because in those first two grades, you're just focusing on fundamental life skills: reading, writing, the four basic math operations... things every student should have down by the end of second grade. (Though, forcing kids through the system when they *haven't* actually mastered those basics? Well, that's a whole different conversation entirely.)
It isn't until third grade that you see a real split in ability, where some kids start pulling ahead and others fall behind, making the mastery of knowledge more uneven. That's when my grades actually become worth their weight in gold—they serve as quick feedback for everyone involved, showing us exactly where each student stands.

But honestly, I don't see why there's an issue with factoring speed into the evaluation, provided they’re getting the accuracy right too.
Personally, I wouldn't dream of extending a "no-grading" period indefinitely. Without proper, timely feedback—because let's be real, who actually reads descriptive comments? Most kids are just obsessing over their letter grades or whether they got a gold star or a smiley face—they just end up drifting along without any clue if they actually know the material or if they've reached a proficient, advanced, or excellent level.

There is a significant difference between someone mastering a concept in a month versus taking five months, because if they lag behind, those gaps in knowledge tend to just pile up in future lessons.
It’s kind of like math; does it really not matter if a kid fully grasps their multiplication tables in November or if they’re still struggling through it in May while the rest of the class has already moved on to much more complex stuff?

Richard Perez3 said:So, regarding your little take on how "parents just have to accept the grades," I’m sitting here thinking, "Man, I wish it were that simple."
😁

Edit. Honestly, this whole obsession with "child competency" makes me want to gag. It’s all just a way to dismiss actual expertise and real skill, acting like everyone's an expert and anyone can do anything. People love to blame the entire American education system for being broken, acting like it's some massive failure because it doesn't coddle every single kid and hand them a trophy for existing. It's pathetic.

It's pretty obvious now, isn't it? 😁

it is.😁

Richard Perez3 said:Yeah, exactly. That's why.
Was it really that hard to see?

no😁

I guess since I know how many people tend to jump on board with these kinds of "progressive" ideas, without actually making eye contact or hearing the actual tone of someone's voice, I just can't really tell what anyone's true stance is, maybe.😁
sorry.
i'm glad you aren't one of those types.👍

Richard Perez3 said:Ugh, I wish.
I literally just saw this half an hour ago and, honestly, it's enough to make me lose my mind.

Yeah, right. Like the system isn't already tearing people apart.
☕

I’m not entirely sure why it hit you so hard, though I suppose I get it; personally, it makes my blood boil just thinking about any kind of... institution... where there isn't a shred of accountability, where nobody is held to any standard, there's zero discipline, let alone oversight, and everyone just does whatever they feel like—or nothing at all if they aren't in the mood.🤮
Just imagine if your own kid was constantly calling the shots, dictating your entire schedule, and you were expected to just respect every single one of their little "decisions" without any criteria whatsoever.🤣

I can't help but worry that the students at those fancy private academies in New England are being completely taken advantage of.😂 😂
Yeah, right.

rowdypanther12 said:I’m honestly stuck on what needs to change in how we actually teach. I could just say we need more hands-on activities or better ways to encourage critical thinking, but those are just empty buzzwords.
I want to see a curriculum designed by actual experts—and I don't just mean subject matter experts, but people collaborating with specialists who truly understand child brain development and how kids learn at different stages. I want to read a program and think, "Wow, this is it." Something where kids actually grasp the concepts instead of just memorizing definitions to pass a test.

The truth is, there isn't any subject matter that is inherently understandable, engaging, and relatable to absolutely everyone. There just isn't.
There is no such thing as a universal magic formula.
And maybe there shouldn't be, either. I suppose some people are naturally going to grasp things better than others, while some won't, and some might become intensely fascinated by a topic while others simply aren't.
Definitions—which, frankly, are already overrepresented in our current textbooks—are really just secondary.
And I think all of that is perfectly fine and normal. We have grading scales from A to F, and I guess it might be time for parents to just accept that reality. (It seems to me that most of their frustration stems from those grades anyway).
School isn't exactly an amusement park where every single person is supposed to be having a blast, all the time, without exception.
I don't quite get this obsession with making everything constant, high-energy, and—let's be honest—highly functional entertainment.🤷
As for critical thinking, well, if you ask me, that skill develops way before they even step foot in a classroom, so it’s not like we need to explicitly teach it only within school walls.
If a student doesn't have even a basic theoretical foundation in... well, anything, they probably aren't going to have much luck with higher-level reasoning or applying what they've learned.
Now, I’m certainly not talking about mindless rote memorization; I’m all for learning through comprehension, but I guess that just doesn't work for everyone or in every single situation.

Susan James said:I’m asking you the exact same thing.
If you ask me what I’d change about our education system to prevent this kind of confusion from happening, I think we really need to rethink how we prioritize certain subjects. It's interesting because, looking at what kids learn today, they're already diving into things like vaccine science in the early grades, calculating interest rates on bank accounts, and practicing currency conversions in math class. I remember back when I was in school, we spent so much time on rote memorization that sometimes it felt like we were just learning how to pass a test rather than understanding how the world actually works. If I could step in and redesign the approach, I’d focus more on critical thinking and media literacy. Instead of just teaching the mechanics—like how to swap dollars for euros or how an interest rate works—we should be teaching students how to evaluate information and understand the "why" behind the facts. We need to give them the tools to navigate a world full of conflicting data so they can make informed decisions on their own. It’s all about building that foundation of logic early on!

I honestly think it’s just a fact of life: intelligence—or the lack thereof—tends to follow a bell curve. You can try all you want, but you can't just pour knowledge or common sense into everyone's head. Some people just get it, and others... well, they don't. It's one of those things you eventually just have to accept.
Regarding the vaccination situation, things have been getting interesting with the rollout of the new education laws. It seems like the Secretary of Education is actually pretty chill about it—she’s basically saying that if a parent chooses to take their kid to a private pediatrician for a consultation instead of using the school nurse, that should be perfectly fine. It's an interesting shift in how they're handling parental choice versus school requirements. It looks like they'll be posting something publicly in a few days..

Quincy:

When it comes to elective subjects, parents generally get to make those calls themselves anyway. But the real question is whether everyone is actually required to participate in those extra extracurricular activities—like, say, a check-in with the school nurse. In my view, a parent should always have the option to either handle those consultations personally or simply let the school professional take the lead. It’s so important to clear up these kinds of details, especially when you're navigating through all the conflicting information floating around lately.

It’s honestly wild how the Secretary of Education can just drop statements like that without even blinking, yet you don't see a single peep from school administrators or healthcare professionals. It feels like everyone is just looking the other way. 😲

I mean, I’ve been reading between the lines here, and honestly, I’ve come to my own conclusion. She didn't explicitly mention anything about being against vaccinations, but she definitely handed those foolish parents exactly what they wanted.
It’s not just about the vaccination debate, either—it's that whole dynamic where people walk right into a school and start demanding things like they own the place.
Because parents have that right.🙄

When it comes to those Swiss folks... honestly, I think even the best math professor would have tripped up with them. So, I wouldn't say the issue lies solely in whether someone actually understands how interest calculations work—because even an expert can mess that up. To me, the real issue goes a bit deeper than that: it’s about how they were chosen in the first place. 🙂

But that's really the exact point we're always harping on about here—ministers and principals are ALWAYS going to side with the PARENTS. Always.
I mean, you can't really raise your voice in a way that the public actually hears, mostly because they're more powerful, louder, and just much more numerous.

The Secretary plus the principals plus the parents versus the teachers.

It feels like an eternal, and probably always lost, battle.

rowdypanther12 said:If our education system were better, we probably wouldn't be dealing with so many anti-vaxxers and people drowning in debt in the States 😁

I mean, excuse me, but I don't think we're really looking at the product of a formal education system here; it feels more like the result of endless Google searches and those various other ways people tend to "stay informed" these days, if you know what I mean.

I guess I should probably start by saying that I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately, though I’m not entirely sure if it matters much in the grand scheme of things. It seems like we often find ourselves circling back to these same old patterns, almost as if we’re stuck in some kind of loop that we can't quite break out of, even when we know better. Maybe it’s just the way things work, or perhaps it's just us being human, which is its own kind of complication, I suppose. Anyway, looking at what urbantinker8 was saying, it really does make you wonder about the underlying reasons for why we react the way we do when faced with these kinds of shifts in our daily lives. It’s a bit subtle, isn't it? Not something you notice right away, but once it hits you, it lingers. I don't know, maybe I'm overthinking it, but there's definitely something there worth pondering if one has the patience for it.

nimblelynx7 said:I went to a technical high school, and interest rates weren't mentioned once—not even in a P&G class. If I had gone to a business school, maybe they would have discussed them more, but only 10% of students go to business school, so what happens to the rest?

A friend of mine has done photography his whole life; he started as a hobbyist and is now a semi-pro. He wanted to open a photo studio, but it turns out he’s "unqualified" because the state requires a specific vocational degree to run a photography business, and since he's an electrical engineer, he doesn't qualify as a photographer.

Of course, the goal is to save teaching jobs. The entire school system exists primarily for that purpose (other reasons include heating the buildings and selling textbooks). If the school system actually cared about the students, it would collapse from pure shame.

Naturally, despite teachers acting like kids are just stupid, incompetent, or products of even worse parents, the kids have actually figured out how the system works. It’s all about cramming today and forgetting tomorrow, because once graduation hits, nobody cares—certainly not in the real world. In school, you aren't actually learning anything useful anyway.

It’s always the previous grade level's fault that kids aren't ready for the next step. The biggest culprits are the mothers who spent their pregnancies reading tabloids instead of Leo Tolstoy or Goethe, and clearly didn't spend enough time solving double integrals.

Amen!

They pat themselves on the back for their "expertise" and then go and blame the parents.

Are they, and to what extent, willing to pay parents to actually do their jobs for them?

Are you honestly convinced that the curriculum and all those training programs haven't shifted one bit in the twenty years since you finished that famous technical institute of yours? I mean, I guess it’s possible, though it seems unlikely, given how much everything tends to drift over such a long stretch of time.
I suppose you’re under the impression that if someone didn't learn it directly from PIG, then nobody else—neither before nor after your tenure—ever bothered to learn it at all, right?
I was just wondering where you actually pulled that 10% figure from regarding students in business schools and similar vocational programs? I guess I might have missed the specific study or report you're looking at, maybe, since I haven't come across those exact numbers in my own reading lately.

I’m interested in all of it, really. Please, feel free to share whatever is on your mind.☕

I guess I should probably start by saying that I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately, though I’m not entirely sure if anyone else has even noticed the shift in how things are moving. It feels like we’re constantly being told one thing, only to have the reality on the ground turn out to be something else entirely, which I suppose is just how life works most of the time, isn't it? I was reading through some old discussions—you know, the kind where people used to actually sit down and weigh the pros and cons without rushing to a conclusion—and it struck me how much the tone has changed. Maybe it’s just me, or maybe it’s the general atmosphere of the country right now, but there seems to be this constant pressure to have an immediate, loud opinion on everything. I tend to prefer a more measured approach, I guess, where you let the dust settle before deciding if something is actually a disaster or just a minor hiccup in the grand scheme of things. It’s easy to get swept up in the noise, but I find myself drifting toward those quieter, more contemplative corners of the internet where people still value nuance. Or perhaps I'm just getting older and more cynical, which is always a possibility, but I think there's a certain dignity in waiting to see how the pieces fall into place before making a definitive statement. It’s a slow process, I know, and it might not be particularly exciting for everyone, but it feels like the only way to stay somewhat grounded when everything else feels so incredibly frantic.

I suppose I’ve been sitting here wondering, somewhat aimlessly, about the whole dynamic between teachers and parents lately, specifically regarding whether there's any actual willingness on the part of educators to essentially pay parents to step in and do their jobs. It sounds like a bit of a wild concept when you first say it out loud, doesn't it? But I guess if you look at the current state of the American education system—where everyone seems a little burnt out and stretched thin—you start to wonder where the lines are drawn. I mean, is there really a scenario where a teacher might feel compelled to compensate a parent just to handle some of the administrative or instructional heavy lifting that they simply don't have the bandwidth for anymore? Maybe it's more about a subtle exchange of value than literal cash, though I suppose that's a bit of a stretch. It feels like we're entering this strange territory where the traditional roles are getting all blurred, and I can't quite decide if it's a practical solution to a systemic problem or just a sign that things are becoming increasingly disorganized. I guess it depends on how you view the responsibility of the school versus the home, which is a conversation that never really seems to end.

Of course not, goodness gracious.🙂
It’s more of a philosophical question than anything else, I suppose, but it really gets at the heart of things—how much would you actually be willing to pay, and to what extent, just to have me handle the responsibilities of a surgeon for you?🙂
I suppose if I weren't actually getting paid to do my job, most people wouldn't even let me draw a single sheep for them, let alone trust me to watch over their livestock or try teaching their kids anything at all.☕
I guess there’s a small, somewhat stubborn part of me that actually finds itself craving homeschooling, if I’m being honest. It’s just this nagging feeling that if everyone were forced to step outside the traditional system, they might finally open their eyes and realize how much time they’ve spent tearing things down for absolutely no reason at all. Maybe people would stop all that senseless finger-pointing once they actually had to face the reality of it themselves.
I suppose people could just go back to focusing on their actual jobs, leaving education—and honestly, a pretty significant chunk of upbringing too—to the professionals who actually specialize in that field and know how to handle it properly.🥳

Susan James said:Parents will stop interfering once you stop asking for their permission for everything, stop calling them into school for every little hiccup, showing them every single test score, and begging them to help the kids study.

Honestly, seeing how much debate has flared up here over minor details—like whether certain facts in a geography lesson are being taught or not—makes it pretty obvious how much energy is being wasted on trivialities. It lets parents dictate how you do your job, and usually, they just end up criticizing it.
The Secretary of Education is doing the exact same thing with her proposed education law changes. It’s such a shame that as professionals, you didn't step up and react to that.
In the online consultation proposals, there's a ton of copy-paste nonsense from people demanding homeschooling or insisting that parents are the ultimate authority on their child's upbringing and should be left entirely to their own devices.
But hey, once the law passes, at least we'll have legalized the flaws in our school system. That'll probably lead to even more chaos in the classroom, since parents will likely have to give permission for every school counselor or psychologist visit. I wouldn't be surprised if it extends to medical checkups too, because apparently, the parent is always right. That's what the Secretary says, anyway,)
If you look at the link, you can see how underserved communities are facing pressure regarding where USA funds should be directed. To me, that’s further proof that some schools need urgent modernization before others (and I'm pretty sure training photographers and hairstylists isn't a national priority... unless being a blogger or YouTuber is one of the top career goals for kids these days?)

As Summer would probably put it, I can swear on my life that I have never allowed my parents to interfere with my job in any capacity, other than maybe some parenting advice.
I mean, I have never once called a parent, unless there was some absolute disaster happening in my classroom (God forbid🙂) or if I felt like proactively sharing test results or expecting them to sit down and study with their kids.🙂
Not when I was teaching elementary school, and certainly not when I moved up to middle school.

Yet somehow, they still find ways to meddle. It seems like people get defensive the moment they hit a wall because they've crossed a line of professional etiquette or tried to play armchair expert regarding my field (even if they won't admit it's mine and not theirs).
Personally, I tend to deal with people pretty quickly if they actually deserve to be checked.🙂🥳

But unfortunately, not everyone works that way, and I suppose we aren't going to see any real progress or meaningful reforms as long as things stay stuck in this cycle.

venera_veritas said:That sounds like something a guy who thinks he’s a tactical genius while sitting on his couch watching the NFL would say.

😂

Susan James said:That's why they'll probably focus on equipping schools for photographers (which really should be a course, not a three-year vocational trade), hairdressers (who we have plenty of exporting right now), or painters and wallpaper installers (tasks most DIY enthusiasts handle just fine using a few YouTube tutorials without needing formal schooling)....

I've been thinking about this for a few days—all these "modernized" career paths. It honestly feels like it's just a way to prevent certain teaching positions from being phased out. Now, reading the news, it looks like they're even targeting specific workshops for funding... and when I say "funding," I mean finding ways to wash through European Union grants. 🕺

At the end of the day, no curriculum reform makes any sense unless you have motivated, enthusiastic teachers who actually believe in their mission and are ready to defend their teaching methods against both parental pressure and passing trends.

...and you're only going to find someone like that once people stop constantly criticizing the profession, stop trying to micromanage how teachers do their jobs (you know, those people who think they know better than the actual experts), once decent working conditions are actually provided (adequate space, supplies, reasonable class sizes...), and once we end the negative selection process caused by salaries that are, frankly, hovering somewhere around what a cashier makes at a decent big-box retailer.☕

Regarding outfitting those photography classrooms, do you actually have a link for that, or were you just using it as a figure of speech?
Because I genuinely doubt those claims, especially since even various cabinet members put computers at the top of the priority list before anything else. We'll probably never actually see them arrive, but it sure is nice to talk about them.🙂
And by the way, there's a chronic shortage of hairdressers; I have a few friends who run their own salons and they've been struggling to find employees for years. Part of that is probably because everyone wants to be their own boss nowadays and nobody wants to work for someone else, but then again, if there wasn't demand, those salons wouldn't be packed and the prices wouldn't be so sky-high.😒