Posts by shadowtiger0

Jose Wells3 said:Listen, friend, in my career I've dealt with a student who was assaulted at thirteen, a sea of kids with parents struggling with alcoholism or drugs, children showing signs of schizophrenia, every possible spectrum of trauma, neglected and sick kids. My child's teacher lived through the death of a student. I am responsible for providing first aid in my school and I carry that weight with me every single day; I have a first aid kit right here in my classroom, I know how to administer an enema, I know how to react during a seizure. I deal with parents I'd have to report to CPS, I coordinate with the police, and I deal with lazy colleagues. Every day I'm in direct physical danger walking home late after a shift. Don't talk to me about responsibility.

A surgeon once told me he wouldn't teach even if they doubled his salary, because he's in awe of the patience required for our profession. He said performing heart surgery is routine for him, and at least his patients stay quiet.🤣

I love him and his dark sense of humor.

On the other hand, there's this jerk who told a pregnant woman she shouldn't address the baby by name because it's just a "fetus," not a person (I'm a pediatrician). Today, that same person sits there with a medical degree they basically memorized, unable to even deliver a baby anymore, instead spending their time sucking up to corrupt politicians and writing meaningless papers on medical history. They were always sleazy; I couldn't fathom them even studying medicine. Dirty nails, messy hair, zero hygiene.

Friend, you have no idea what it's like to face a reading list that spans 26 pages just for a single exam. A reading list.

Back when we were students, the hardest exams in the country were in my and your major: organic chemistry and new American literature. Nothing compared to medicine.

In my case, there were six semesters where retakes weren't even an option. In your colleagues' case, you already know the deal.

I never had a single exam like that.

Just being able to cram and having a high capacity for rote memorization doesn't mean everyone coming out of med school is worthy of respect. Just ask me about the doctors who treated me, or the idiot who told me when I was nineteen that I had six months to live after my brain scan came back...

We aren't "friends" because we didn't grow up sharing trading cards like kids do, so...

You have a bit too high an opinion of yourself; we aren't on the same level as doctors (the ones working on the front lines), and that is the truth, regardless of what you think.

Do you really think I haven't dealt with children facing the exact problems you're describing? You think there was only one?

Was it me who helped them in the end, or someone close to me who happens to be a psychiatrist? What do you think the correct answer is?

And that someone close to me does that every single day—literally every single God-given day for years now.

Fine, you don't like doctors and you think you know more than them. Next time you feel sick or, heaven forbid, get injured, go find that colleague of yours with the liberal arts degree and let him help you, since he—you know—actually sat through Anatomy in college.

As for the difficulty of the subjects, I can only laugh. Comparing your college experience to mine against Medical School... 🤔

That specific subject at my school that you claimed was the hardest (though I have no idea what metrics anyone uses to decide what's "hardest"—I guess you'd have to visit every university in America and conduct a massive scientific study to get any kind of meta-analysis of the data...) was only hard because that specific professor made it that way.

Nothing more, nothing less.

I am just an ordinary teacher. I love kids and I try to help them. In fact, just today, I had a very serious talk with my class about bullying. A VERY serious talk.

But if you're asking whether I'd go out of my way to play the hero—acting like some kind of saint or someone I'm definitely not—then the answer is a hard no.

Kate Jackson4 said:It doesn't need to be coding in every single high school... It could just be tailored for general tracks—things like mastering MS Office, digital literacy, or navigating various apps. There is plenty to cover without needing to write code...

Honestly, kids these days pretty much figure this stuff out on their own anyway.

I'm with MH on this one—language majors are essentially humanists by trade, so coding isn't really their vibe, nor is it particularly necessary for them.

Anthony Stewart5 said:Of course there isn't a single standard, as earning a Master's or a PhD is an entirely different matter altogether, and universities themselves dictate their own specific prerequisites for admission?

Is it truly possible to simply walk away from a specialized vocational program and transition directly into higher education without any further preparation? One might wonder if such a leap is feasible, yet the reality suggests that a more structured approach is required.

What we are truly lacking is sufficient hands-on experience compared to our peers, which means that even after completing vocational training, students emerge with only a fragmented understanding of their craft; yet, isn't the entire purpose of such programs to ensure they are fully prepared to hit the ground running in the American workforce?

Personally, we had plenty of practical training at our university—honestly, I don't see any way someone could breeze through a Kinesiology major unless they have an endless supply of energy and aren't afraid of combining intense physical labor with constant studying.

Hold on, I didn't realize that—so there isn't any vertical mobility like we have back home?

From what I can gather, our academic gatekeepers basically play games with professional degrees—they just won't let you move up to a doctorate, though I've heard that's starting to shift lately—whereas abroad, the path is wide open. I actually know people personally who finished a five-year professional program here and headed straight for a PhD overseas, even though they wouldn't have stood a chance in the American system.

Jose Wells3 said:So he’s a doctor. How does that make him better than you?

Maybe he’s a theorist who couldn't even perform a basic stitch if his life depended on it. Maybe he’s just some corrupt hack. Or maybe he’s a complete fraud who spent his career breeding offspring only to land a cushy seat at the National Academy of Sciences, churning out useless papers on our dime while we do the actual work (our editorial staff knows exactly who I mean). Perhaps he’d sell his Hippocratic Oath for five hundred bucks. Maybe he learned anatomy via YouTube. Or maybe he’s just completely incompetent.

My old man wasn't anything special, and honestly, he gave me a hard time my whole life. But even so? He was still a better human being than 80 percent of doctors out there, and far more capable of teaching practical skills than any MD I've ever met.

We don't all belong to that inner circle of "distinguished" doctors. There's a huge crowd of them in Congress, so clearly they're geniuses.

There's a bit of everything, sure. I'll be the first to admit that an epidemiologist shouldn't be pulling the same paycheck as a surgeon—not that I even knew about this mess until now...—but they do.

That said, in most cases, doctors were top-tier students with incredible memories and a hell of a work ethic. On the day they decided to take on a grueling specialty right after graduation and grind away at it for years—believe me, that makes a massive difference compared to what we do.

I breezed through my college years... sort of. Some harder classes gave me a bit of trouble, but hey, I made it. If you saw the sheer volume of studying a doctor has to do, followed by their actual workload—you wouldn't say that.

Let me give you an example to illustrate: Pat. One of my buddies from the crew is getting married. We didn't have one of our resident doctors on duty at the ER that night. He rolls into the OR around 11 PM. Usually, he's this high-energy, hilarious guy—a textbook extrovert. This time, he's silent, eyes glued to the floor. We, being our usual "cheerful" selves, try to crack a few jokes to get him going. Finally, he snaps: "Guys, seriously, stop messing around, I just had a patient die on the table..."

Can you even imagine the looks on our faces? Now, imagine seeing that every single month for the rest of your life, while watching family members whine about every little thing while these guys just stay silent, swallow it, and push forward.

The medical professionals I know are all on the front lines actually working. As for those ones lounging in comfy office chairs? Not so much.

I'm not saying our job sucks (because it doesn't!), but it isn't like theirs. Not even close.

Anthony Stewart5 said:I don't know anything about your background, whether you have children, or what your own relationship with the education system looks like.

I am speaking strictly from my perspective as a parent. In our experience, when my child was in after-school care, they were exceptionally well looked after; they received three nutritious meals, had their homework completed, and returned home feeling genuinely content. Is it not true that many parents would find a sense of relief if they didn't have to spend every evening hovering over their children to ensure they study? Furthermore, wouldn't this provide children with a vital opportunity to socialize and cultivate a sense of self-discipline?
To be perfectly honest, I struggle to see any significant advantage in an eleven-year-old coming home at 12:30 or 1:00 PM only to sit around waiting for their parents to finish the workday. 🤷

Personally? I absolutely loathe doing homework with my kids. And mind you, I’m a teacher—school has basically been my entire life. Not to mention how poorly designed most of these assignments are; they're often so convoluted that a child can't possibly grasp them. It’s glaringly obvious that these textbooks were written by some PhD academic who hasn't spent a single day actually working in a real American classroom.

Sarah Hall53 said:Nah, Cleveland only does that for the elementary level.
So why don't they just roll that out across the whole US?
The answer is pretty obvious: why pay two teachers when you can just dump everything on one person and save half the budget? That’s basically how Harvey Weinstein—who apparently runs the finance department at the Department of Education—thinks. He's like that guy who survives in any social circle by being just slippery enough, and his ultimate goal seems to be making teachers work 40 hours of straight instruction a week while actually paying the school for the privilege... well, if his recent moves and statements are anything to go by.

I mean, one teacher isn't going to pull it off. How is that even physically possible? 🤔

Anthony Stewart5 said:In Seattle, they only offer that for the lower grades.

Typically, one teacher handles half the subjects while another covers the rest. The school day pauses around noon for lunch and a quick break before resuming; one instructor takes the morning block, and the other manages the afternoon.

To make a day look, it follows this flow:
Morning assembly and a brief meeting to start the day
Breakfast
Classes, studying, or playtime
Lunch, combined with play and learning sessions
More lessons and tackling any necessary homework
Afternoon snack

The textbooks stay at the school from Monday through Friday, and students only take them home for the weekends.
It is worth noting that the fixed schedule was primarily for the specialized instructors teaching specific subjects; everything else was left to the discretion of the main teachers, allowing them to decide the best balance between instruction, playtime, and study sessions.

They have dedicated foreign language instructors as well; my child had a specialist for that in fourth grade, along with a music teacher, and I believe there were others as well, though I cannot recall specifically.

By the time the children entered fifth grade, they were completely prepared for specialized subject instruction thanks to that immersive full-day environment, and in my opinion, this model should be extended through eighth grade.

Awesome 👍👍👍

Anthony Stewart5 said:Since 1979, the city of Cleveland has offered an all-day school program, a model that isn't universally available in every district. This initiative has been executed with remarkable success for over forty years, providing a structured environment where children remain on campus from 8:00 AM until 4:00 PM at the latest. Specifically designed for the younger grades, the program ensures that every classroom is staffed by two teachers, allowing for a seamless integration of academic instruction and enriching leisure activities that children truly enjoy.

It is difficult to grasp what this individual could possibly hope to achieve by proposing such a concept, given that a system nearly identical to his vision is already successfully established right here in America.

That sounds like a winner 👍

nimblelynx7 said:Then where else are you supposed to learn this stuff if not in college? Prep schools are honestly the worst kind of secondary education, even if they act all elite and superior. You spend four years studying everything, then graduate and realize you don't actually know anything useful; everything you learned is basically just trivia for pub quizzes. If you don't head straight to a university after that, you're screwed. You'll be forced into some specific vocational training for a job, and all that knowledge about the Baroque period, logic, the GDP of Uzbekistan, or Napoleon wars? You can just throw it in the trash.

So you're claiming the curriculum at an electrotechnical high school is a total joke, and anyone can teach it?

Not even close. It's definitely not as easy as it looks.

nimblelynx7 said:You misunderstood me. I have five years in electrical engineering and five years in law.

It all depends on what you do and where you do it. You need to see the kind of expertise and pressure a lead engineer deals with when they're commissioning an industrial plant worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Unfortunately, that wasn't me—that was a colleague of mine.

Looks like you’re in the same boat as me—stuck with two completely unrelated degrees under your belt. 😁

I spent my early career working in the oil industry—think ExxonMobil levels of intensity—and honestly, the stress was so relentless I was staring down a massive burnout. It was exhausting. Fortunately, I eventually had that moment of clarity where I realized my happiness wasn't going to be found in constant jet-setting or stacking up a mountain of cash; instead, it’s something you have to cultivate internally. So, I made the pivot over to education, and I haven't regretted a single second of it. I genuinely love working with kids—it's a completely different world, and I'm much better off for it.

The real issue today isn't just one thing—it's the suffocating mountain of paperwork and the fact that teachers have been stripped of any actual authority. It’s like they’re expected to be glorified data entry clerks instead of educators. I don't personally run into this wall, though—mostly because I actually have a backbone, and, well... let's just say I'm not exactly a pushover. 😁 Honestly, plenty of my colleagues are going through all sorts of things—ranging from burnout to straight-up disillusionment. Teaching used to hold a certain level of respect, but let’s be real: the profession has taken a massive hit, though that’s not just limited to educators. It seems like every field is sliding downhill lately. I guess that’s just the kind of society we're living in now.

This friend of mine who’s working as a physiatrist now—he spent years absolutely grinding away in the ER. He was basically running on autopilot just to keep people alive, totally drained, but he was out there doing the work and saving lives every single day.

It honestly cracks me up whenever someone brings up school in the context of "stress." Like, sorry, but teachers haven't the slightest clue what actual pressure feels like—the kind where you’re responsible for a multi-million dollar project or, well, a human life (okay, I don't know about the latter, but I’ve been dealing with that dynamic in my own family my entire life).

Oh, absolutely—if you’re looking for proof that professors have been stripped of their authority and left completely out of the loop, you won't find a better example than this. It’s a total reality.

Jose Wells3 said:People call him a "veterinarian" as an insult because he treats students like a flock of sheep, assuming they can't tell the difference. Honestly, he should just stick to his degree—whether that means focusing on his actual field or tending to livestock—and stay far away from education reform.

There’s a running joke about those attending KFC, but I don't think it's helpful to weaponize someone's education level during a debate before they've even finished their own studies. Even if you believe it, it doesn't actually add anything to the conversation.

Whatever—the guy has a doctorate. We aren't educators. That's just the reality of it.

As for those jokes about our department? Sure, they exist. They exist for every major out there. But let's be real—we aren't kids anymore; we all know which programs are grueling and exactly what kind of people enroll in them.

nimblelynx7 said:It’s enough to teach anyone up until high school graduation. But that’ll never happen because everyone is too busy protecting their cushy seats and sinecures at the state teacher colleges.

I wouldn't go that far regarding it being "enough" for graduation. High school curricula aren't some joke—at least they weren't back when I was sitting in those desks.

The real headache is figuring out how to attract top-tier STEM talent into the public school system these days... I never could have imagined a world where kinesiology majors would actively dodge teaching jobs (because, let’s face it, it isn't exactly rocket science), yet here we are. It's simple: there are so many opportunities now. You can make just as much money running a few private training sessions, coaching local club teams, or doing some collegiate sports consulting, and boom—you're pulling in a teacher's salary without any of the soul-crushing paperwork, angry parents, or nightmare principals.

Nowadays, it's really just the humanities majors who are struggling; I honestly don't see a way for them to monetize their degrees in the actual workforce while staying within their field of study.

Even the linguists—those specializing in actually "useful" languages—have basically become the new STEM kids.

Jose Wells3 said:Before we dive in, perhaps we should take a collective look at how things are handled over in Europe at Eurydice ? That might help us draw some conclusions about what qualifications are actually necessary, what alternative pathways could look like, and where they fit within the educational hierarchy.

As I mentioned before, the issue of subpar degree programs persists. It’s the same old story: whenever people start criticizing education, they aim their shots at primary and secondary schools, while the universities are busy trying to "reform" everything—all while lazy bureaucrats and political appointees run failing departments.

The sheer rigidity of our university system is a problem in itself. On paper, you can supposedly do anything. In reality? You can't. How am I supposed to study chemistry alongside English literature, or physics with art history, if that’s the specific combination I want for my career? The system just won't allow it.

I also think it’s a solid idea to allow people to earn certifications for high-demand subjects through alternative routes. However, we should set some guardrails: perhaps a minimum of a Bachelor's degree for certain roles, or even a Master's combined with relevant teaching experience and a certain level of maturity.

I fully support involving students in the process. We need to drastically cut enrollment quotas for oversaturated fields and boost them for others. Furthermore, we should be hiring students to fill specialized vacancies via a centralized database. Honestly? I’d advocate for penalizing those who refuse such placements. Of course, this would have to be balanced with incentives for those who step up—things like seniority credits and academic points for practical skills.

My stance remains unchanged: for core subject instruction, nothing less than a Master's degree should be considered—except, perhaps, in cases of extreme teacher shortages. Even then, we could follow a hybrid model of classroom instruction and lectures, which I’ll detail further down.

While I welcome alternative pathways and additional training for non-educators, let’s be realistic: with salaries at this current level, nobody is going to jump into teaching for extra work.

In my view, it’s perfectly reasonable for elementary teachers to undergo a five-year program. They could complete three years of traditional lectures and exams, followed by two years of heavy practice and specialized coursework on a 70:30 ratio. A final thesis based on their actual field experience should be mandatory, along with a professional exam and licensing.

Early childhood educators could follow a similar track: three years of college followed by two years of hands-on practice and focused instruction with a reduced course load. This would culminate in a Master's thesis centered on their practical experience, topped off by a professional exam and licensure.

Oh, and yes—this would finally clear out the masses of pure theorists from the universities. I believe I've touched on that before.

Yeah, universities are incredibly insular. Everyone working in education knows just how desperate we are for special education teachers—so why not allow students from related departments to just take the necessary bridge courses and go straight into a master's program? That would fill those vacancies instantly. Let's be real: a 40-year-old with a psychology degree isn't going to start all over again at the ERF. Just let them move into a master's track and you've solved the problem with someone who actually knows what they're doing.

As for "theorists"—they're mostly just people who love the sound of their own voices.

nimblelynx7 said:Exactly. Then again, they say an intelligent, educated person knows when they’re out of their depth and stays out of it.

I have two degrees. Does that mean I can teach veterinarians how to treat cattle? They only finished one, right? I've seen a cow, it has four legs, and I've drunk milk—I know where it comes from. Surely that makes me an expert.

I'm in the same boat—two degrees myself, one in Engineering and one in Education.

When I look at my doctor friends or family, I feel like I'm stuck in a sort of intellectual middle ground—both in terms of career trajectory and actual knowledge accumulation, not to mention the stress levels. Honestly, the only person I’d trade places with is a friend of mine who’s a physical therapist; he’s got it pretty good. The only downside is the pay—it's kind of similar to what a veteran high school teacher pulls in.

silverbear74 said:And what kind of high schoolers were even applying to the Teacher Training College back then? Nowadays, it’s mostly mediocre—if not bottom-tier—students enrolling. Nobody from the top-tier prep schools in Chicago wants anything to do with it. For years now, they've basically treated Teacher Training College as just another elective course, much like Business or most of the majors over at the University of Arts and Sciences.

Because that’s exactly what it is. Every single one of my colleagues who came from competitive prep schools tells me that high school was actually tougher than college. And we’re talking specifically about the education major here, just so there’s no confusion.

I see people here using "veterinarian" as some sort of insult toward the Secretary (even though the man is a PhD, but let's just gloss over that for a second). Honestly, I wouldn’t want MY KIDS being taught by teachers who think being a veterinarian is somehow derogatory.

It’s an incredibly demanding program—certainly way harder than what some of my colleagues currently working in schools went through—so when they try to degrade him by calling him a "vet," they’re really just exposing themselves. It says more about them than anything else. But then again, I’ve seen plenty of that in faculty lounges: massive egos with absolutely zero substance to back them up.

If they wanted to call him a Republican Party hack, a bad politician, or whatever other labels they want to throw around—fine, no problem there.

But the guy is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, and people with four years of experience from the College of Arts and Sciences are out here trying to use his profession as a slur...

John Palmer9 said:Maybe we should lower the requirements for teachers—not necessarily needing those advanced degrees. I guess personality and mental readiness matter more than having a PhD or a Master's. It feels a bit redundant to require a specialized engineer just to teach basic math or chemistry.
If the goal is to turn full-day schooling into glorified babysitting, then I guess that's what it is. That should probably be strictly voluntary and limited to elementary school kids.

Honestly, an Associate's degree—or what we'd call a Bachelor's in some contexts—is plenty for teaching lower grades if we're talking about actual subject knowledge. For decades, people taught with much less advanced credentials, and frankly, I don't see those teachers being any worse than the ones we have today.

John Palmer9 said:I was thinking about a case recently—a bright student, just graduated high school, who basically hit a wall this year because she felt her mom preferred her brother over her. Looking at the situation, it seems pretty clear the mother just isn't great at communicating. If the student had studied something like interpersonal communication within families, she might have realized, first, what healthy communication actually looks like, second, that some people just aren't naturally good at it, and third, that being bad at talking doesn't necessarily mean someone is a bad person.

So, everyone touches on it a little bit, but I guess nobody really gets into the deep, comprehensive stuff.

Are you working in the American education system or something?

Adam Diaz67 said:Some schools don't even have a decent gym. It’s not just elementary schools; I bet one of the biggest high schools in the US probably doesn't even have a proper gym for PE.

And the PE teachers... well, they're questionable. Especially the older ones. I recently saw my old elementary school teacher, who was also my homeroom teacher back then. He was a great guy, a handball coach too. When I was his student, he was in his early 40s. Now he's in his early 60s, just counting down the days until retirement. He hasn't let himself go, but age catches up with you. On the other hand, I remember my high school PE teacher—a woman also around 60, right on the edge of retirement—she was tiny. She couldn't demonstrate a single one of the moves she was supposed to grade us on 👎

Since a lot of schools rent out their gyms on weekends, I've checked out quite a few places around Washington, D.C. (finding a slot for small-sided soccer isn't always easy). It's a massive headache. And you can tell at some of them that they were great when they were first built, but there was never much investment in maintenance. 👎

I know the drill firsthand—I teach PE.

The issue with this subject is how easily you can "fake it." Try faking Math or English, and see what happens.

I don't have issues with the actual drills because I'm still mobile enough, though who knows where I'll be in 20 years. My struggle is that I’m a big guy, and as you get older, weight becomes a factor; moving 180 lbs is a lot easier than moving 220 lbs when you're older—muscle mass just doesn't behave the same way. And it doesn't matter if that extra weight is muscle instead of fat—gravity doesn't care.

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve had to invent obstacle courses, "adjust" scores on equipment, scrape together cash for new balls, or bring my own gear from home only for the kids to lose it... you name it.

Sometimes you write one thing in the grade book and do something completely different because, frankly, it’s impossible to execute the full curriculum as written.

Look, I’m genuinely all for changes and I don't mind the extra work. I'm not even complaining about the pay—as long as the ratio of salary to cost stays steady (which won't happen, thanks inflation), I'm fine. But there is so much that could be fixed with the money the Government is earmarking for this project.

In my opinion, plenty of colleagues should be getting formal warnings, and some honestly deserve to be fired. And predictably, it’s always the people who aren't in short supply—the ones who would literally work as waiters just to keep their jobs—who end up being the problem.

There is so much groundwork that needs to be laid before we even start talking about these kinds of systemic shifts.

If you ask me, the priority should be hiring more psychologists, speech therapists, and special education specialists. Kids today have specific needs, and we need professionals to meet them.

As for the idea of general educators taking over PE for grades 1-4? I actually support that. Not because the elementary teachers are bad—many are fantastic and made it their specialty—but simply because kids are different now and require more specialized instruction. These young kinesiology grads are great; they aren't like the old guard from decades ago.

But honestly, it doesn't matter if you hire 100 kinesiology experts if they don't even have a gym to teach in.

Trying to deal with the FBI's training programs is an entire saga on its own. Honestly, the conditions are pretty brutal most of the time—it’s basically just constant improvisation at this point.

If our local schools actually had even a third of the equipment they have over at a major university's athletic department, we might actually be getting somewhere.