School Reform: Thoughts?

Gregory Howard3 said:Can someone actually explain why everyone’s tripping over vocational students and the SATs when it comes to college admissions?

Back when entrance exams were a thing, they stuck to the standard high school curriculum. No specialized vocational subjects on the tests—except maybe drawing for architecture, which is still the case today.

If I’m remembering right from the old study guides I still have lying around:
All the engineering schools used the same math and physics entrance exams (plus drawing for architecture). The prep material was just the standard high school textbooks for math and physics.
The tech colleges used those same high school math and chemistry books.

Liberal arts programs looked at English grammar, general knowledge, and IQ tests—all based on the standard high school curriculum.

Business schools focused on English and math—not sure if there was a general culture test back then—but again, just high school textbooks.

...

Yeah, business schools used to do English, math, and computer science, but man, that was a long time ago.

Brandon Newman95 said:Yeah, business schools used to do English, math, and computer science, but man, that was a long time ago.

can't really recall, never actually planned on majoring in econ...

the thing is, the entrance exams were based on the standard US high school curriculum, so nobody felt left out...

urbantinker8 said:I’m not entirely certain if there’s even a dedicated track for masonry students within the current system.🤔

but, I suppose it doesn't really matter.
I wasn't exactly aiming for those three-year vocational programs anyway, since, from what I gather, kids coming out of those specialized tracks don't typically even bother sitting for the SATs.
And no, I wouldn't say that success on standardized tests depends solely on the individual subject teacher.
that's just total nonsense, honestly.

There definitely is.

wanderinggardener12 said:First off, these academic competitions are setting a terrible precedent. I wouldn’t be against them if they actually involved the entire class—say, at least 75% of the students from a single grade level participating together.
Secondly, having a high school graduation exam that focuses solely on English, math, and a first foreign language really calls the importance of every other subject into question. Even as an English teacher myself, I don't see why my subject should be elevated to one of the three pillars of such an assessment. That said, once you get to college, everyone should certainly be required to pass basic grammar, spelling, and stylistics. Beyond that, these exams don't test oral communication at all. Reading comprehension is just tucked away as part of literature requirements, which is frankly useless for most university programs.
Thirdly, we should have standardized state exams throughout middle and high school under controlled conditions, rather than dumping everything into one massive, high-stress final exam. These tests ought to serve as feedback for both the schools and the teachers, providing students with scores they could actually use—perhaps by selecting their eight best exam results in a specific subject to qualify for further education.
Fourth, a teacher's or a school's grading system shouldn't be reduced to a single exam or limited to just one graduating class. Looking at a few snapshots of instruction tells you nothing; anyone can design two perfect lesson plans. And don't even get me started on how much administrative paperwork says about actual quality.
Fifth, the current teaching methodologies for various subjects are completely incapable of assessing functional abilities. The real issue lies in the failure to measure baseline versus end-of-year results, yet nobody seems to want to talk about that. The only field where this measurement is clear and unambiguous is in physical education, simply because they have a stopwatch.
I could go on, but I honestly don't have the energy.

Please, keep going, because this is honestly the most sensible thing I’ve read on this topic. We desperately lack concrete improvements, real proposals, and an actual identification of the problems within our education system.

And I am so glad to see this coming from an American literature teacher. As much as it's a core subject, so many people actually degrade it, treating it like an afterthought that everyone is just supposed to know, or just a chore involving reading boring books.

It’s also true that speaking assessments aren't performed; expression is limited to writing or testing someone on the plot of a book. There’s no verbal expression, no poetic speech, no vocabulary expansion through vocalization, and debates are rare—even if my colleagues don't bring them up.

Could you share some thoughts on assessing functional abilities? For instance, in your own subject, how do you gauge them at a functional level beyond just basic writing, if you know what I mean?

How much field-based learning is actually represented in our schools? For example, do you ever have the chance to read a book and simultaneously visit locations mentioned in it nearby? In a place like Washington, D.C., there are endless landmarks, but there are plenty of sites all across America too.

What’s the deal with this new reform? Are you involved in it, what’s your take, and do you think it’ll actually work? Has it even started yet?

silentraven6 said:Please, keep going, because this is honestly the most sensible thing I’ve read on this topic. We desperately lack concrete improvements, real proposals, and an actual identification of the problems within our education system.

And I am so glad to see this coming from an American literature teacher. As much as it's a core subject, so many people actually degrade it, treating it like an afterthought that everyone is just supposed to know, or just a chore involving reading boring books.

It’s also true that speaking assessments aren't performed; expression is limited to writing or testing someone on the plot of a book. There’s no verbal expression, no poetic speech, no vocabulary expansion through vocalization, and debates are rare—even if my colleagues don't bring them up.

Could you share some thoughts on assessing functional abilities? For instance, in your own subject, how do you gauge them at a functional level beyond just basic writing, if you know what I mean?

How much field-based learning is actually represented in our schools? For example, do you ever have the chance to read a book and simultaneously visit locations mentioned in it nearby? In a place like Washington, D.C., there are endless landmarks, but there are plenty of sites all across America too.

What’s the deal with this new reform? Are you involved in it, what’s your take, and do you think it’ll actually work? Has it even started yet?

Organizing field trips isn't exactly the hard part, I guess, but actually pulling them off from start to finish can be quite a struggle because, well, fewer and fewer kids seem interested or even able to participate in them lately.
I know of plenty of schools that design these excursions to align perfectly with the curriculum for specific subjects, and on paper, everything works out beautifully.

But then, I suppose, reality eventually catches up.

Gregory Howard3 said:can't really recall, never actually planned on majoring in econ...

the thing is, the entrance exams were based on the standard US high school curriculum, so nobody felt left out...

About 90% of us from vocational high schools ended up getting into our first-choice colleges. Do I feel cheated? Not even slightly.
It was easy enough. Most of those people are working now—some of them are even in management.

Brandon Newman95 said:About 90% of us from vocational high schools ended up getting into our first-choice colleges. Do I feel cheated? Not even slightly.
It was easy enough. Most of those people are working now—some of them are even in management.

??? I never said I couldn't, I just don't get why everyone's losing their minds over this whole state exam drama involving vocational schools.

Personally, a specialized exit exam makes zero sense because it just boxes people in. Like, what if someone who studied computer tech decides they'd rather go into construction? What exam would they take... the general one, the construction one, or both? And don't even get me started on if they wanted to study business...

Brandon Newman95 said:About 90% of us from vocational high schools ended up getting into our first-choice colleges. Do I feel cheated? Not even slightly.
It was easy enough. Most of those people are working now—some of them are even in management.

Exactly.
People just went to college prep courses, crushed their entrance exams, and moved right along.
I know plenty of people who graduated from technical high schools, and honestly, they don't lack a solid education—if anything, they have a huge head start because of their specialized training.
Sure, they might be a little light on history or Latin, and maybe they didn't stay up late reading all those classic novels, so they might not win a debate club championship, but they know their stuff. 🥳

What I really wanted to get at is how back in my day, everyone did college prep, and now, it seems like everyone is doing SAT prep instead.
It’s actually a bit overwhelming to see how many of these private tutoring centers are popping up, how successful they are, and how many kids (even from traditional academic tracks) are enrolling. To me, the standardized testing system itself feels a bit questionable in terms of quality and purpose.

You see ads everywhere screaming, "Didn't study enough? You can catch up!"
In my opinion, that sends a terrible message about education as a whole.
It's a shame that the U.S. Department of Education essentially tolerates these massive tutoring industries. It's like things children should ideally master during their regular schooling are being outsourced to extra courses. They aren't mandatory, of course, but there's this intense pressure; you need those scores for college applications, so parents end up paying for it just so their kids don't fall behind.
But I get why it's allowed—if it weren't legal, all this tutoring would just happen under the table.
Just like the tutoring that happens during the school year anyway.
At least the government gets to collect sales tax on it.

And it pains me to say this, but a lot of people within the education system actually benefit from this setup.
You have mediocre teachers who still pull a decent salary while students go to tutors to actually learn the material. Those tutors are often professors themselves, picking up an extra two paychecks a month.
Even the great teachers find it useful... because they become the go-to recommendation for students (often through different agencies to avoid any conflict of interest), making it easy for them to find clients.
More and more students are choosing "easier" academic tracks, which then leads them straight into SAT prep and remedial courses.

I won't guess who wrote the original post, but I have to say: standardized testing shouldn't be used as a metric for whether a teacher is successful or not.
Because most students are passing thanks to private tutoring.
Plus, you have to factor in a child's individual talents and interests.
The system might have been well-intentioned, but it buckled under the sheer pressure of college admissions and the race for higher scores.

Gregory Howard3 said:??? I never said I couldn't, I just don't get why everyone's losing their minds over this whole state exam drama involving vocational schools.

Personally, a specialized exit exam makes zero sense because it just boxes people in. Like, what if someone who studied computer tech decides they'd rather go into construction? What exam would they take... the general one, the construction one, or both? And don't even get me started on if they wanted to study business...

Okay, so there was clearly a misunderstanding. We had the standard national exams back then, and anyone who pulled straight A's all four years was exempt from taking them.
The rest of us (myself included) had to sit through the whole thing.
So no, I wasn't cheated out of anything.
And yeah, I agree, making a specific vocational exam just limits what those students can do.

People change their minds all the time. Someone signs up for a trade school and then suddenly wants to study psychology—which exam are they supposed to take then? It’s a mess.

It’s honestly delusional to expect some random "cram school" to get kids ready for their SATs regardless of what they actually picked up during their years in the classroom. unicorn, are you seriously suggesting a kid can make up for twelve years of missed lessons in just three months? In my book, prepping for an essay-based exam starts back in elementary school when you're first learning how to put a coherent sentence together. Anyone who thinks a student can be ready for a major national standardized test after just ninety days of intense studying probably thinks these exams are just about memorizing trivia. But that's not how it works. Take the English composition section, for example—it's designed to test critical thinking and reading comprehension, not just whether you can recite facts from memory.
What these prep courses are actually good for is reviewing material (if you weren't disciplined enough to do it yourself) or maybe filling in a few tiny gaps, but there is absolutely no way they can replace a full K-12 education.

There is something truly fascinating about watching people dig their heels in against the idea of using standardized, objective benchmarks to measure what someone actually knows.

The advocates for experimental teaching methods and those who cling to the philosophy that "every child is a natural genius" seem to be squirming quite a bit lately. 🍿

@hiddendriver34 👍

urbantinker8 said:I suppose that might make a bit more sense, though I guess it still doesn't really change the core reality that students actually need to study if they want to pass any kind of SAT, final exam, or standardized test, and it isn't strictly just the teacher's fault or credit when someone succeeds or fails.

For instance, looking back at my own time in middle school and high school, I definitely had the absolute best physics teachers ever.
And no matter how incredible they were, I could never really push myself past a C, or maybe a B on a good day, mostly because I just don't have a science brain and, honestly, I usually couldn't wrap my head around anything they said when they were explaining all the different types of motion and stuff.🙈

On the flip side, I ended up having the most uninspiring, terrible teachers in the very subjects I eventually went to college for.

It's not that the first group was to blame for me being mediocre at physics, nor were the second group responsible for me absolutely crushing their subjects later on.

Of course, but if students are being shuffled into different classrooms at random, yet one group consistently outperforms the other on standardized tests—year after year, generation after generation—it is highly improbable that we are looking at mere coincidence. 😁

It goes without saying that a multitude of variables influence student performance; judging an educator’s entire career based on the outcomes of one or five specific students would be fundamentally unjust. Consequently, standardized testing applied to a sufficiently large sample size would likely yield some rather compelling data. That said, it would be sheer nonsense to attempt a direct comparison between vocational school students and those attending elite preparatory academies, where the entrance requirements are significantly more rigorous.

urbantinker8: The current situation regarding the proposed updates to the Code of Conduct is nothing short of a farce. If you look closely at the language being pushed by the U.S. Department of Education, it’s clear they aren't just refining guidelines; they are attempting to fundamentally rewrite the social contract within our schools. It reminds me of when a major tech corporation suddenly changes its terms of service overnight—suddenly, everything you thought was standard practice is now a violation. We are seeing a blatant disregard for the protections established under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Instead of fostering an environment of academic rigor, these bureaucrats seem more interested in policing thought through administrative overreach. It’s a slow-motion Revolution against parental rights and local autonomy. We should be wary of this creeping expansion of federal oversight.

urbantinker8 said:I can't speak for everyone else, but I think I know exactly why I get so defensive whenever someone brings up the idea of "teacher performance reviews."🙄

First off, you always see parents pushing for these evaluations for all the wrong reasons—usually because they’re frustrated with mediocre grades, a lack of actual knowledge, or disappointing SAT scores... because, naturally, any failure their kid experiences gets dumped squarely on the shoulders of some supposedly incompetent teacher.🤦

Then there’s the issue of who would actually be doing the evaluating. Most of them would probably be school counselors, and let’s be honest, there are plenty of amateurs in that field. You have people who haven't stepped foot in a classroom in over twenty years; they've completely lost touch with how students learn today, what the curriculum looks like, or even how grading works, yet they're more than happy to play judge and jury.

Thirdly, nobody actually has a concrete plan for how this "assessment" would even work in practice. Just looking at standardized test scores doesn't prove anything. And trying to organize formal peer observations for every single teacher every few years? That's practically impossible because it would require an immense amount of money and time—resources our Department of Education certainly doesn't have to spare.

Personally, though, I don't really have an issue with it, and I'm certainly not worried about someone dropping in on my class or giving me some clever little suggestion, especially since my students consistently perform great on their exams and in competitions.🙂
What really gets under my skin is when people who know next to nothing about the education system, specific subjects, or even kids in general, try to insert themselves into conversations where they don't belong, loudly claiming that schools are failing, teachers aren't doing their jobs, and innocent children are just caught in the middle.

If a lack of knowledge isn't considered a valid grievance, then we have to ask ourselves: what actually qualifies as a legitimate reason for dissatisfaction? It’s a bit like complaining about the menu at a high-end steakhouse when you don't even know what a ribeye is—you can be unhappy, sure, but your complaint lacks any real substance. If ignorance isn't the catalyst, then what is? Is it a failure of process, a breach of trust, or perhaps a misalignment of values? We need to dig deeper than just "I don't understand" and look at the actual mechanics of why things aren't working.

If you refuse to accept that you might be the common denominator in your students' failure, then where exactly does the fault lie? If we blame everything else—irresponsible kids, a lack of study habits, puberty, or even innate talent—we're just making excuses. If your students’ test scores are consistently lagging behind those of your colleagues across the country who teach the exact same grade levels, the data eventually tells the truth. You can't hide from the results forever.

wanderinggardener12 said:First off, these academic competitions are setting a terrible precedent. I wouldn’t be against them if they actually involved the entire class—say, at least 75% of the students from a single grade level participating together.
Secondly, having a high school graduation exam that focuses solely on English, math, and a first foreign language really calls the importance of every other subject into question. Even as an English teacher myself, I don't see why my subject should be elevated to one of the three pillars of such an assessment. That said, once you get to college, everyone should certainly be required to pass basic grammar, spelling, and stylistics. Beyond that, these exams don't test oral communication at all. Reading comprehension is just tucked away as part of literature requirements, which is frankly useless for most university programs.
Thirdly, we should have standardized state exams throughout middle and high school under controlled conditions, rather than dumping everything into one massive, high-stress final exam. These tests ought to serve as feedback for both the schools and the teachers, providing students with scores they could actually use—perhaps by selecting their eight best exam results in a specific subject to qualify for further education.
Fourth, a teacher's or a school's grading system shouldn't be reduced to a single exam or limited to just one graduating class. Looking at a few snapshots of instruction tells you nothing; anyone can design two perfect lesson plans. And don't even get me started on how much administrative paperwork says about actual quality.
Fifth, the current teaching methodologies for various subjects are completely incapable of assessing functional abilities. The real issue lies in the failure to measure baseline versus end-of-year results, yet nobody seems to want to talk about that. The only field where this measurement is clear and unambiguous is in physical education, simply because they have a stopwatch.
I could go on, but I honestly don't have the energy.

The goal isn't to test whether a student actually turned the pages of a book; it's about assessing their reading comprehension and their ability to extract specific information from a text.

There was once an older girl at the convent who would come by every eight days to handle the laundry and cleaning. Because she was a descendant of an old noble family that lost everything during the Revolution, the Archbishop’s office provided her with special protection. This status allowed her to dine at the table reserved for the honorable sisters in the dining hall, where she would sit and gossip with them for a while before heading back to her chores. It wasn't uncommon for the students to slip out of their classrooms just to catch a glimpse of her.

Why would the schoolgirls be slipping out of their classrooms?
A. To listen to stories from the older girls
B. To gossip with the nuns
C. To flirt with the young men
D. To go for rides in carriages

American Language, advanced level. 😁 It doesn't even matter if they've actually read the assigned book; they have the excerpt right in front of them anyway.

Linda Price5 said:Of course, but if students are being shuffled into different classrooms at random, yet one group consistently outperforms the other on standardized tests—year after year, generation after generation—it is highly improbable that we are looking at mere coincidence. 😁

It goes without saying that a multitude of variables influence student performance; judging an educator’s entire career based on the outcomes of one or five specific students would be fundamentally unjust. Consequently, standardized testing applied to a sufficiently large sample size would likely yield some rather compelling data. That said, it would be sheer nonsense to attempt a direct comparison between vocational school students and those attending elite preparatory academies, where the entrance requirements are significantly more rigorous.

urbantinker8: The current situation regarding the proposed updates to the Code of Conduct is nothing short of a farce. If you look closely at the language being pushed by the U.S. Department of Education, it’s clear they aren't just refining guidelines; they are attempting to fundamentally rewrite the social contract within our schools. It reminds me of when a major tech corporation suddenly changes its terms of service overnight—suddenly, everything you thought was standard practice is now a violation. We are seeing a blatant disregard for the protections established under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Instead of fostering an environment of academic rigor, these bureaucrats seem more interested in policing thought through administrative overreach. It’s a slow-motion Revolution against parental rights and local autonomy. We should be wary of this creeping expansion of federal oversight.

If a lack of knowledge isn't considered a valid grievance, then we have to ask ourselves: what actually qualifies as a legitimate reason for dissatisfaction? It’s a bit like complaining about the menu at a high-end steakhouse when you don't even know what a ribeye is—you can be unhappy, sure, but your complaint lacks any real substance. If ignorance isn't the catalyst, then what is? Is it a failure of process, a breach of trust, or perhaps a misalignment of values? We need to dig deeper than just "I don't understand" and look at the actual mechanics of why things aren't working.

If you refuse to accept that you might be the common denominator in your students' failure, then where exactly does the fault lie? If we blame everything else—irresponsible kids, a lack of study habits, puberty, or even innate talent—we're just making excuses. If your students’ test scores are consistently lagging behind those of your colleagues across the country who teach the exact same grade levels, the data eventually tells the truth. You can't hide from the results forever.

The goal isn't to test whether a student actually turned the pages of a book; it's about assessing their reading comprehension and their ability to extract specific information from a text.

There was once an older girl at the convent who would come by every eight days to handle the laundry and cleaning. Because she was a descendant of an old noble family that lost everything during the Revolution, the Archbishop’s office provided her with special protection. This status allowed her to dine at the table reserved for the honorable sisters in the dining hall, where she would sit and gossip with them for a while before heading back to her chores. It wasn't uncommon for the students to slip out of their classrooms just to catch a glimpse of her.

Why would the schoolgirls be slipping out of their classrooms?
A. To listen to stories from the older girls
B. To gossip with the nuns
C. To flirt with the young men
D. To go for rides in carriages

American Language, advanced level. 😁 It doesn't even matter if they've actually read the assigned book; they have the excerpt right in front of them anyway.

I think I’ve already explained my position.
First off, I don't personally believe that I am the sole cause of a student's ignorance—at least, speaking strictly about my own experience here.
If I have a class where maybe four or five students are performing at a top tier—hitting high marks on state exams and winning national competitions—and another fifteen to twenty are doing quite well (and I’m talking about their actual achievement on standardized tests, not just the grades I hand out), while there's a small group of about ten who are barely scraping by... well, naturally, I don't walk away thinking I am exclusively responsible for the failure of those ten.
And yet, it’s precisely those parents of the struggling ten who tend to look at me as the convenient scapegoat, making a huge fuss and demanding that I be investigated or scrutinized in one way or another.🙄

Again, I really don't mind being held accountable, but I just don't want it to be because of some frantic parent who can't quite see where the real issue actually lies.
It would probably be much more helpful if the evaluations came from people who could actually offer meaningful suggestions or constructive criticism.
Instead, it feels like they're mostly just checking to see if I filled out every single box in the gradebook or if I included every possible question from a test.🤦

Linda Price5 said:Of course, but if students are being shuffled into different classrooms at random, yet one group consistently outperforms the other on standardized tests—year after year, generation after generation—it is highly improbable that we are looking at mere coincidence. 😁

It goes without saying that a multitude of variables influence student performance; judging an educator’s entire career based on the outcomes of one or five specific students would be fundamentally unjust. Consequently, standardized testing applied to a sufficiently large sample size would likely yield some rather compelling data. That said, it would be sheer nonsense to attempt a direct comparison between vocational school students and those attending elite preparatory academies, where the entrance requirements are significantly more rigorous.

urbantinker8: The current situation regarding the proposed updates to the Code of Conduct is nothing short of a farce. If you look closely at the language being pushed by the U.S. Department of Education, it’s clear they aren't just refining guidelines; they are attempting to fundamentally rewrite the social contract within our schools. It reminds me of when a major tech corporation suddenly changes its terms of service overnight—suddenly, everything you thought was standard practice is now a violation. We are seeing a blatant disregard for the protections established under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Instead of fostering an environment of academic rigor, these bureaucrats seem more interested in policing thought through administrative overreach. It’s a slow-motion Revolution against parental rights and local autonomy. We should be wary of this creeping expansion of federal oversight.

If a lack of knowledge isn't considered a valid grievance, then we have to ask ourselves: what actually qualifies as a legitimate reason for dissatisfaction? It’s a bit like complaining about the menu at a high-end steakhouse when you don't even know what a ribeye is—you can be unhappy, sure, but your complaint lacks any real substance. If ignorance isn't the catalyst, then what is? Is it a failure of process, a breach of trust, or perhaps a misalignment of values? We need to dig deeper than just "I don't understand" and look at the actual mechanics of why things aren't working.

If you refuse to accept that you might be the common denominator in your students' failure, then where exactly does the fault lie? If we blame everything else—irresponsible kids, a lack of study habits, puberty, or even innate talent—we're just making excuses. If your students’ test scores are consistently lagging behind those of your colleagues across the country who teach the exact same grade levels, the data eventually tells the truth. You can't hide from the results forever.

The goal isn't to test whether a student actually turned the pages of a book; it's about assessing their reading comprehension and their ability to extract specific information from a text.

There was once an older girl at the convent who would come by every eight days to handle the laundry and cleaning. Because she was a descendant of an old noble family that lost everything during the Revolution, the Archbishop’s office provided her with special protection. This status allowed her to dine at the table reserved for the honorable sisters in the dining hall, where she would sit and gossip with them for a while before heading back to her chores. It wasn't uncommon for the students to slip out of their classrooms just to catch a glimpse of her.

Why would the schoolgirls be slipping out of their classrooms?
A. To listen to stories from the older girls
B. To gossip with the nuns
C. To flirt with the young men
D. To go for rides in carriages

American Language, advanced level. 😁 It doesn't even matter if they've actually read the assigned book; they have the excerpt right in front of them anyway.

That's why I keep saying that the state exams are becoming more of a joke year after year.
Especially for English.
And when you have questions like that, the passing rate ends up being... what, 30%?🤦

Starting this fall, behavior violations in K-12 schools will be split into four levels: minor, serious, severe, and extra severe. Under these rules, bringing weapons or dangerous items onto campus counts as a severe violation, and actually using a weapon to threaten anyone jumps you straight into the "extra severe" category. They’re also grouping things like major theft, forgery, and violent outbursts right up there with weapons.

The U.S. Department of Education just opened up a public comment period for their new proposed Code of Conduct. They're sticking to the old way where elementary students don't technically get "expelled"—instead, the harshest thing they can do to an elementary kid is force them to transfer to a different school. So, little kids are looking at warnings, reprimands, strict reprimands, or a forced move. High schoolers have it a bit tougher, though; on top of warnings and reprimands, they can face a final warning before being kicked out of school entirely.

According to the proposal, these disciplinary actions kick in for failing to meet duties, skipping responsibilities, bullying, or any other "inappropriate" behavior. This draft is open for feedback until July 27th, and once it passes, every homeroom teacher will be required to sit parents down at the start of the school year to go over these rules.

Here’s the kicker: they’re now going after kids for unexcused absences too. A simple warning is coming for repeat minor offenses or if a student misses between 1% and 1.5% of classes. If you hit the 1.5% to 2% mark, you get a reprimand. Between 2% and 2.5%, it’s a strict reprimand. And if a student misses more than 2.5% of their total hours? They’re looking at being transferred or expelled.

Parents will only have five days from the time a kid gets back to school to turn in an excuse for an absence. The U.S. Department of Education says this whole thing is based on the new Elementary and Secondary Education Act and should roll out by the start of the next school year. Their pitch is that this makes everything uniform—instead of every school having its own random set of rules in their handbooks, everyone will be playing by the same playbook. They claim they aren't trying to screw over the kids here.

MINOR OFFENSES

warning penalty:

1. Disrupting class: causing chaos, being loud, talking back after being told to stop, yelling

2. Littering

3. Using your phone

4. Harassment, shoving, or throwing stuff at people

5. Gambling

SERIOUS OFFENSES

reprimand penalty:

1. Cheating using unauthorized tech (tablets, phones, etc.)

2. Belittling, insulting, or spreading lies and rumors

3. Bringing in or using drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes

4. Bringing in unauthorized people who cause damage to the school or others

5. Vandalism resulting in significant damage

SEVERE OFFENSES

strict reprimand in middle school, or a warning before expulsion in high school:

1. Inciting violence (this includes chanting about it or filming fights)

2. Falsifying reports

3. Promoting group hate speech

4. Theft, destroying official school records, or extortion (like shaking down another student for cash)

5. Bringing weapons or dangerous items onto campus

EXTREME OFFENSES

transfer to another school or outright expulsion:

1. Forging official school documents

2. Posting material

online or any other way that ruins someone's reputation, honor, or dignity

3. Grand theft—basically stealing in a dangerous or brazen way, like breaking and entering or bypassing security to get to property

4. Threatening the safety of students or staff

by using weapons or dangerous objects

5. Violent behavior

Well, that's precisely the situation we find ourselves in today 😕

Those reforms were an absolute disaster; they haven't achieved a single thing 🤦

says: It is frankly delusional to expect some specialized "test prep centers" to ready children for their SATs regardless of what they actually absorbed during their years in the classroom. nosorog, do you truly believe that a child can somehow compensate for twelve years of academic development in a mere three-month sprint? In my estimation, the preparation for writing an essay on a standardized exam should effectively begin with simple composition exercises in elementary school. Anyone who posits that a student can be fully prepared for national exams in just ninety days likely views such tests as nothing more than a rote memorization of facts—something that can be crammed into the brain through intense, short-term grinding. But that is not what these exams are. I could speak at length about the English language portion, which is designed to test comprehension and analytical skills far more than any collection of static, factual knowledge. What these prep courses offer is merely the opportunity to review material (assuming one possesses enough self-discipline to have learned it initially), perhaps clarify certain points, or build upon existing foundations; they are by no means a substitute for the entire educational journey.

Furthermore, they are not replacements, but rather a systematization of what has already been acquired. For instance, while certain vocational schools might not focus heavily on essay writing, if a student actually uses their intellect—meaning they are literate in English and possess a strong command of a second language—they can utilize these prep sessions to learn how to structure an essay and receive specific instructions on how to execute a particular task.

Who is ultimately to blame for the declining knowledge levels among graduating seniors? It is the parents and their immediate social circles. They fail to demand critical thinking in daily life; they discourage reflection on the phenomena and events surrounding them, instead filling their children's heads with the mantra that "there are no rules, everything is random, it's all just luck." Well, let me tell you, luck and randomness will not help you calculate the angles of a trapezoid, which was certainly required on this year's exam!

Education is not confined to the walls of a school or the memorization of a curriculum; true education requires one to keep their mind engaged and active throughout the entire day.

"Education isn't just about sitting in a classroom and memorizing textbooks; it demands that you actually keep your brain switched on twenty-four-seven."
👍

analogseal18 said:

says: It is frankly delusional to expect some specialized "test prep centers" to ready children for their SATs regardless of what they actually absorbed during their years in the classroom. nosorog, do you truly believe that a child can somehow compensate for twelve years of academic development in a mere three-month sprint? In my estimation, the preparation for writing an essay on a standardized exam should effectively begin with simple composition exercises in elementary school. Anyone who posits that a student can be fully prepared for national exams in just ninety days likely views such tests as nothing more than a rote memorization of facts—something that can be crammed into the brain through intense, short-term grinding. But that is not what these exams are. I could speak at length about the English language portion, which is designed to test comprehension and analytical skills far more than any collection of static, factual knowledge. What these prep courses offer is merely the opportunity to review material (assuming one possesses enough self-discipline to have learned it initially), perhaps clarify certain points, or build upon existing foundations; they are by no means a substitute for the entire educational journey.

Furthermore, they are not replacements, but rather a systematization of what has already been acquired. For instance, while certain vocational schools might not focus heavily on essay writing, if a student actually uses their intellect—meaning they are literate in English and possess a strong command of a second language—they can utilize these prep sessions to learn how to structure an essay and receive specific instructions on how to execute a particular task.

Who is ultimately to blame for the declining knowledge levels among graduating seniors? It is the parents and their immediate social circles. They fail to demand critical thinking in daily life; they discourage reflection on the phenomena and events surrounding them, instead filling their children's heads with the mantra that "there are no rules, everything is random, it's all just luck." Well, let me tell you, luck and randomness will not help you calculate the angles of a trapezoid, which was certainly required on this year's exam!

Education is not confined to the walls of a school or the memorization of a curriculum; true education requires one to keep their mind engaged and active throughout the entire day.

Man, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. If anything, it's the schools that teach these kids not to think for themselves, forcing them to believe that the only thing that matters is what's printed in some textbook—definitions that, half the time, have zero connection to real-world phenomena or anything actually happening around them. The curriculum they serve up to these kids is just mind-numbing and totally alienating for most of them, but hey, who cares about that, right? As long as someone's lining their pockets with textbook royalties, the job's done.🙄

hiddendriver34 said:It’s honestly delusional to expect some random "cram school" to get kids ready for their SATs regardless of what they actually picked up during their years in the classroom. unicorn, are you seriously suggesting a kid can make up for twelve years of missed lessons in just three months? In my book, prepping for an essay-based exam starts back in elementary school when you're first learning how to put a coherent sentence together. Anyone who thinks a student can be ready for a major national standardized test after just ninety days of intense studying probably thinks these exams are just about memorizing trivia. But that's not how it works. Take the English composition section, for example—it's designed to test critical thinking and reading comprehension, not just whether you can recite facts from memory.
What these prep courses are actually good for is reviewing material (if you weren't disciplined enough to do it yourself) or maybe filling in a few tiny gaps, but there is absolutely no way they can replace a full K-12 education.

I find it hard to say whether it works or not because I haven't personally attended those classes, so I don't know exactly what they cover.
But I certainly see people signing up. And I see them paying $833 quite a premium.
The advertisements for these courses seem to be popping up on every street corner.
And it looks like a huge number of parents believe this is an absolute necessity.
Some even take out loans if they don't have the cash on hand.
There's even advice circulating to enroll kids in "easier" high schools just so they can coast through with good grades, thinking they'll have plenty of time to catch up during the final exam prep...
On top of that, most of these programs market themselves using "15+ years of experience" (ranging from college entrance prep to SAT prep), claiming their instructors are veteran professors who simultaneously teach in public schools.
I have nothing against people making extra money, but I think it’s a bit of a hit to the entire American education system when someone uses a private course to fill the gaps left by others, or essentially charges a premium to do a job that should have been covered in class.

Personally, I am all for external evaluations.
Absolutely.
Evaluating based on professional standards, student feedback, and even "adult" follow-ups after graduation.

But my point is that a student's score on a standardized test isn't solely the result of one high school teacher's work... in fact, looking at your post, it's clear that an English score can be influenced by elementary teachers, middle school teachers, and high school teachers alike. And if there was a maternity leave or a substitute involved, who are we actually evaluating? Whose work are we measuring?
We were all students once, and we all had different teachers for the same subjects... everyone differs in their teaching style, personality, and depth of knowledge.
And that makes a massive difference.

When it comes to foreign languages, it becomes even harder to judge a teacher's effectiveness based on exam scores... some kids have been learning since preschool, they have access to TV, the internet, music, language schools, summer camps abroad, plus the mix of good and bad teachers they encounter... not to mention the child's own interest and innate talent.

So, in the grand scheme of things, the SAT results aren't a very reliable way to grade a teacher or a school.

Though, it does worry me how much focus is placed on cramming facts while children struggle to actually think critically.
Our education system feels a bit broken because kids aren't being taught how to think; they aren't even encouraged to do it.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Lawrence Torres56 said:Man, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. If anything, it's the schools that teach these kids not to think for themselves, forcing them to believe that the only thing that matters is what's printed in some textbook—definitions that, half the time, have zero connection to real-world phenomena or anything actually happening around them. The curriculum they serve up to these kids is just mind-numbing and totally alienating for most of them, but hey, who cares about that, right? As long as someone's lining their pockets with textbook royalties, the job's done.🙄