jadetinker85 said:Then they’d just implement entrance exams for the popular high schools, which plenty of them already do. Everyone stays happy and satisfied. Kids wouldn't be stressing over grades during elementary school anymore.
It's funny how little it takes to "solve" a massive issue...
Sarah Hall53 said:Honestly, I’m just sitting here wondering who on earth is actually going to volunteer to be a homeroom teacher at this experimental school 😂 The thing is, they aren't counting homeroom duties toward your standard teaching hours anymore—so instead of having a full schedule, you just get a tiny 2.5% bump on your total salary, and it’s all strictly voluntary. What's the catch? Well, my friends, right now being a homeroom teacher is basically the equivalent of two extra teaching periods—one hour for advisory and one for general info, plus another two hours of pure administrative chaos. If you have a particularly difficult class, you're looking at at least six hours a week, if not eight, just dealing with the sheer volume of paperwork. We're talking everything from playing judge and jury for classroom discipline to printing stuff out on your own paper (because why not?), collecting permission slips, filling out endless spreadsheets because some bureaucrat decided they needed them, tracking who's eating breakfast in the cafeteria, chasing down excuse notes, and even calling NASA or the local police when things go sideways. Basically, under the current system, it pays about 10% of your salary, which helps people hit their full-time requirements—but even then, everyone feels totally burnt out and underpaid for the amount of work involved. And now they want to "increase" the compensation to... 2.5%? Yeah, right. No sane person is going to sign up for that kind of workload in specialized subjects, and according to the A2 programs, unless you're teaching advanced English or math, these roles aren't even mandatory for teachers.
I assume the principal will just appoint whoever they want to be the homeroom teacher. It's the same way it works here—when a supervisor issues an order, particularly if it's in writing, there really isn't much room for negotiation.
Dana Smith2 said:I honestly don't see this gaining any real traction in the short term. It feels more like a pre-election stunt—though, I suppose, it might work for those looking to run an experimental pilot program first. It’ll be interesting to watch how parents react when their kids finish the school year without that perfect 4.0 GPA.
For what it's worth, my colleagues over at my firm—in the actual private sector—have been pushing for full-day schooling and shorter summer breaks for years. They'd probably split the breaks up however they wanted: maybe one stretch from July 1st to the 20th, another from the 20th to mid-August, and then a final stretch leading into September. Just whatever fits their schedule best. And naturally, you just know those kids will still end up with a 4.0.
Maybe it would be a funny experiment if, just for one year, every single teacher in America gave every eighth grader a straight 4.0. Then everyone gets that precious perfect score they're all chasing. And then what?
Maybe then we just go with the RN option—you know, the one with the extra gear sets included. For an elementary school, I guess that would be perfectly fine enough.
From what I can gather through my various circles—mostly other parents, though I suppose "circles" might be an overstatement—opinions seem to be split right down the middle. It’s quite polarized, really. On one hand, you have people who are absolutely appalled by the idea of a kid being stuck in a classroom from 8:00 AM until the bell rings—and then, heaven forbid, there's actually homework to deal with afterward, which, let's face it, is inevitable—so between school and evening extracurriculars, they feel like their kids are basically running a marathon every single day. Then, on the flip side, you have the others who are just thrilled about it. They see it as a way to keep the kids safe and out of trouble—no wandering around aimlessly—while ensuring they're actually learning and getting a decent lunch. I guess it just depends on how much chaos you're willing to tolerate.
I suppose any director who actually has a legitimate grievance should probably head over to the Secretary's office to file a report. And, well—it goes without saying, really—those who have direct ties to the political party should be doing the exact same thing; that’s just what's expected of them, naturally.
velvetraven23 said:Personally, I have a solid immune system—I'm young and don't worry much about my own health. But when I went to the doctor recently, I was the only one in the waiting room wearing a mask. I put it on out of respect for others, especially the seniors there; I felt terrible thinking I might pass something on to them, even if being masked myself felt a bit uncomfortable. When I finally saw the doctor, she asked why I was wearing a mask. When I explained it was to protect the other patients, she just waved me off. Honestly, it's no wonder you don't see many people masking up anymore.
Even at my place, you can't get through at all if you have a fever—it’s just some automated phone advice instead. I guess that's just how things go now. Masks are mandatory, obviously.
Susan James said:Personally, I feel that if they’ve gone and split things into Level A and Level B (though, honestly, I think splitting them like that insults students' intelligence and just lowers the overall quality of our education system), then everyone attending a STEM-focused high school should be required to take the Level A exam. For those in general or liberal arts tracks—who might have fewer math hours but are still following a standard high school curriculum—they should at least need a 70% passing grade on the Level B exam to actually receive their diploma. The whole situation is just a total circus right now.
I honestly don't see the point of these different tiers. Just have one standard and be done with it. Anyone who actually needs a "higher" level is headed for college anyway, and let's face it—they'll be pulling all-nighters and bleeding for their grades there regardless. The reality check happens pretty quickly during freshman year.
hiddendriver34 said:I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁
I think I’ve already touched on this in another thread—if that makes sense. In my view, someone with those scores definitely isn't cut out for intense fields like pure mathematics, physics, or even engineering at a place like MIT. But—and this is just a thought—couldn't they potentially pursue something where the math load is mostly front-loaded in the first year, like pharmacy or veterinary medicine? Though, obviously, you’d still need to hit the required advanced math standards for admission. You'd probably exhaust yourself during the prep work, pass that meager 25%, and then you're stuck facing that one daunting math exam at university.
rowdypanther12 said:If the issue is just that the requirements are too easy to breeze through, then universities really need to raise the bar. Is it actually possible for a college to require an 80% or 90% pass rate in a specific subject? How much leeway do they actually have when it comes to setting their own enrollment rules?
Well, they should try it—those Ivy League schools that everyone is practically begging to get into. Physics and math departments probably have to pay them just to take their students.
I suspect most kids who, say, pull a C in math—provided they’ve had access to decent, high-end tutoring—are actually more than capable of passing an AP Calculus exam. Whether they’re equipped to pursue a major that's heavily math-dependent later on... well, I guess that’s debatable. But if we're talking about getting into a university where the admissions office demands AP-level proficiency, even if the actual coursework in the major itself is relatively light on math? Sure, why not.
They’re just passing through, finishing up their faxes, and then—what? Nothing happens. If the issue is a low threshold, we should probably just reset the receivers. And a DM ex...
A ton of people have left the healthcare system to head over to Germany—though honestly, without knowing the language, they’re basically just following people around. They can't actually practice their profession until they pass those language exams. Doctors, specifically, are completely stuck without it. And I hear Austria is even more intense about it, demanding a much higher proficiency level. I mean, I don't think IT is the only sector on this entire planet. Maybe you don't need to speak the language if you're a programmer, or if you're just digging ditches or doing DoorDash in Germany, but for pretty much anything else? You definitely need it. But my main point—if I can call it that—is that any extra knowledge we possess is just an added bonus. Also, there are plenty of successful people out there who only speak English. The real key is making sure foreign language learning is accessible to kids through the US school system. At that point, it's up to them whether they take advantage of it or not.
Susan James said:Did any of you ever have an amazing teacher who would organize extra math sessions for the whole class back in 6th or 7th grade because everyone had gaps in their knowledge? Or rather, you guys had five math periods a week, right?
Well, yeah, we did—but only after Christmas, once the entire class had finished being a total disaster on the grading portal and we’d dealt with the parent-teacher conferences. And that was in 6th grade. In 5th, we just had the first teacher, and by 7th, there were two new ones. 6th grade was pure blood, sweat, and tears—basically the fallout from all that remote learning. That’s why I say grades 5 through 7 were generally a wash. What we're dealing with now is actually quite easy; imagine if she actually stuck around until the end of the school year.
Sarah Hall53 said: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.
I think I misspoke earlier—to be clear, before all these unqualified replacements happened, everyone was actually a mathematician from the National Guard. Whether they have a BS, an MS, or whatever their actual degree title is these days... I guess it doesn't matter.
mistypuma18 said:I’m honestly surprised this thread hasn't blown up yet. What actually works for dealing with weather sensitivity?
Personally, I find staying hydrated helps—though I guess that's subjective—but the second I feel that strange pressure building in my head, I just take a 400mg Ibuprofen to try and kill the headache before it really takes hold.
Scott Booth said:Well, bravo to the substitute then! You can't seriously believe that every single sub is unqualified, right? We can't just leave the quality of education up to pure luck. (My child's experience has been the exact opposite; by some stroke of luck, they managed to navigate all those changes without any issues, though unfortunately, many of their classmates weren't so lucky.)
Of course I don't think that—just as our own experiences show us that even "real" math professors sometimes struggle to explain things clearly. She’s just relieved, I suppose; I'd say she finally feels like someone normal and decent is in charge. As for that bit about the 5-to-7-year-olds... I think it's probably better if I just stay quiet on that one.
Look, I’m not saying I’m a racist, or homophobic, or sexist—I’m certainly none of those things—but I’m also not exactly a "woke" person either. I just don't get this obsessive need to force changes onto characters who have always been known by a certain look... and why on earth does everyone feel the need to tie these casting choices to social justice movements? We see it everywhere now: The Little Mermaid is Black, Black Panther is white, Batman is Chinese, James Bond is a woman, and Superman is gay. What is the actual point of all this?
Scott Booth said:Let's break this down step by step: first, let's ensure kids actually have qualified teachers. I don't send my child to school just to be supervised; I send them there so they can exercise their constitutional right to an education. If the government is spending money on various reforms, it means the funds exist—so why not direct them where they actually matter?
I highly doubt that in Finland, children are being taught by unqualified people.
I really don't see the point in dragging the private sector into this conversation. We all fund the school system, from the Secretary of Education all the way down to that one underqualified teacher in the classroom.
My daughter is in 8th grade now, and after five years of constant math teacher substitutions, she’s currently being taught by someone who isn't technically qualified. She claims this teacher is her favorite so far, though—she’s patient, doesn't yell, offers extra help, stays late, and even runs an elective in financial literacy. It feels like she’s trying twice as hard just because she’s labeled as "unqualified." When I look through my daughter's notebook, I don't see anything different—or any less quality—than when she had those English or math teachers before.
rowdypanther12 said:I'm really looking forward to seeing how they've laid out the curriculum and the schedule for this term.
The only thing keeping me sane is the thought that we might actually dodge this entirely—though, from what I gather talking to my colleagues at work, people are pretty split on the whole idea. Some think it’s a total win since everything happens right there at school, including lunch and all that. But then you have others who are just completely repulsed by the notion of kids being stuck in a classroom for the entire day.