And you can't forget about that one group of people who just doesn't want to be there—you know the type—they have zero motivation, they're bored out of their minds, and then they start acting out and messing things up for everyone else. But of course, the teacher always ends up taking the fall for it, claiming it's because they "failed to engage" them in the first place.
Oh man, just so you guys know! The new A2 enrichment program is going to be mandatory for everyone. So, after the usual six hours of classes, they’re tacking on two extra hours of "enrichment"—which basically means teachers will have to juggle remedial lessons, extra coursework, ExxonMobil prep, and grading homework for the entire class all at once. Once a week, maybe they can split kids up based on interests for those two hours, but otherwise, it's just more of the same every single day. It's honestly everything, everywhere, all at once. I mean, just try to imagine the actual quality of work coming out of that mess. And hey, to make things even better, the school won't even give the teachers a single minute of paid time to actually prepare for this A2 nonsense. Long live the reform and the full-day school model—because clearly, everything can just be solved within the school walls!
It’s basically just mobbing people in those faculty group chats to completely SHUT DOWN any kind of counseling through comment sections. We’ve already managed to kill off a couple of documents this way—just by flooding them with a thousand or two angry, negative comments until they eventually get buried in some drawer somewhere.
Honestly, I feel like the USA and a few other places that treat their teachers with such a "warm and fuzzy" attitude—you know, lacking any real professional respect—are the ones constantly struggling to recruit qualified educators. You see it all the time: talented teachers show up, realize how they're being treated, and then just bolt after a couple of years to go do literally anything else. It’s a cycle where schools end up scrambling to patch things over with untrained substitutes, because let's be real—no one with a shred of self-respect is going to stick around under those conditions. I mean, you're stuck at the school for eight hours, and then you still have to drag yourself home to tackle three different piles of exams to grade and endless progress reports to write... all for basically peanuts.
jadetinker85 said:You probably don't need to correct anyone if you aren't the teacher here. ☕
I’d bet anything they’re talking about PE teachers. The workload and prep time for them is totally comparable to what a math teacher deals with, for instance.
You’ve got those three teachers on the school board and that one parent representing the PTA. If just ONE of them—for whatever shady little reason they might have—actually raises their hand to break the tie against those three founders who clearly only care about the bottom line... well, there you go. That's your "experiment."
If his name gets pulled into this whole experiment thing, we’re switching schools. Period. I'll just drive him over to the next district—or even two towns over if that's what it takes to get him away from it.
Honestly, this whole twisted setup they've cooked up is just... wow. It's awful. I am all for reforms that are actually backed by real research—you know, things that make sense—but I am definitely NOT for THIS mess they're trying to feed us. First off, we’re going to see a massive exodus of teachers leaving the school system. Seriously, forget it. If this happens, I'm out. I'll go do literally anything else that offers a standard eight-hour workday where I don't have to bring my job home with me. Because right now, they're basically designing an eight-hour shift that secretly requires you to do endless prep work at your kitchen table. The second thing that's going to happen is a huge surge in homeschooling lobbying. Once this absolute disaster is actually implemented, a ton of parents are just going to pull their kids out of the public schools entirely—because they simply refuse to let their children be stuck in that environment from age 8 to 16.
Has anyone actually sat down and read this document? Because I have, and frankly, I wouldn't wish this on myself or my own kid.
but we aren't talking about some chill after-school program with games and downtime here—this is actual instruction. I mean, mandatory classes, remedial sessions, enrichment programs... just class, class, and more class.
Just talking about the elementary schools for now—though honestly, I hope they scrap the whole thing. What I saw in the draft during yesterday's public hearing was just... it was devastating. It looks like a total disaster waiting to happen for both the kids and the teachers.
I totally get what you mean about theoretical math and what actually constitutes the field. But honestly, I’m struggling to see why you're missing the point regarding the difference between a proper teaching methodology course at a university like Berkeley and some random certification program you take later on? There's a massive gap there—it's not just about knowing the math itself, but actually knowing how to break it down so it makes sense to a kid. It's one thing to master the equations, and a completely different thing to be able to explain them in a way that fits their age group.
It really depends. Did he actually follow the proper methodology during his teaching certification, or did he just take one of those casual, part-time courses at a local community college? Because when it comes to math, that’s a massive dealbreaker for me. He’s definitely got the technical expertise for math, but whether he’s actually qualified to teach it... well, that's a bit more debatable.
Like I mentioned before, it all hinges on whether his degree was strictly in mathematics or just something related. Given how the credit hour requirements work, he might be allowed to teach math if there isn't anyone else with a specialized degree available.
Just a little heads-up here—an engineer isn't technically a "real professor." I mean, depending on whether they're specializing in math or something similar, they’re more like... well, semi-qualified, if you want to be pedantic about it.
In basically all the high schools around here—around Indianapolis and the surrounding areas—it’s pretty standard for kids to pick German as their first foreign language. If there aren't quite enough students to fill an entire class, they just split everyone up into different language groups, kind of like how urbantinker8 described it.
Michelle Nelson4 said:It’s quite interesting how Mad writes, isn't it? In one post, she claims that lazy kids just want to enroll in a program where they only learn the bare absolute minimum of a language. But then, in another thread, she's talking about how much her child struggled to pull off a C grade in third grade, even though the kid supposedly had a solid grasp of German throughout elementary school—which, let's face it, involves way more than five years of study at that stage.
I really wish people would just pick a side and stick to their own logic instead of constantly shifting their story to fit whatever specific situation happens to be unfolding at the moment.😁
First off, I wasn't "reveling" in it. You're only throwing that at me because you have this habit of twisting everything the local "experts" on this forum say—as if we’re all just monsters who somehow hate kids and parents.☕
Look, I said it and I still believe it: taking an introductory language course after five years of study is just taking the path of least resistance—it's laziness. If we weren't talking about a language but math, and someone finished Pythagoras, squares, and square roots, then decided to skip ahead and just learn multiplication tables from scratch, wouldn't you call that lazy too?
And thirdly—yes, the old curriculum for a second foreign language in high school was designed so that you'd hit A2 level by the middle of junior year, and then, magically, jump to B1 within another year and a half. Basically, things that were NOT being covered in elementary school. It’s the same logic as if you studied German from first through third grade, then switched to an elective in fourth, slept through fifth and sixth based on what you learned when you were little, and then got a massive, uncomfortable wake-up call in seventh grade.
They might struggle from first grade onward if they move to an advanced program. They've just had two years of easy A's. I guess the only ones enrolling will be those with wealthy parents who can afford private language academies just so their kids can pick up another language.
I don't think so—I know these families, and they really did have a solid foundation. They weren't my students, obviously, but since we're talking about relatives and friends' kids, I've stayed in the loop. If they had just stuck with the advanced track, they would've had that learning continuity, and I guarantee they wouldn't be hitting this massive slump right now.
Look, I’m telling you—here’s how this plays out. They won't even bother putting it on his record in elementary school just so he doesn't end up having to deal with anything more than the bare minimum once he hits high school...
edit: I mean, I’ve seen a few cases where kids were placed in advanced tracks after spending five years struggling with the basics. They basically spent the first two years of high school sleeping through class and somehow coasted with a B, which felt fine at first—but then everything falls apart. Seriously, by junior year, they start hitting you with actual concepts that weren't even remotely touched upon back in middle school! 😲 And there you are, still sleeping through class and expecting an easy A. Well, guess what? That's when the state steps in and hands you a D. 😛