Student-teacher dynamics vs. parent-teacher dynamics

Susan James said:Quincy:

I haven't seen any posts from you yet! If you have something on your mind or just want to jump into the conversation, feel free to share. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts! kaže: I was chatting with a colleague who used to teach over there, and he mentioned that things have actually improved quite a bit. It sounds like the situation is incomparably better than it used to be.

What does "incomparably better" actually mean?
How many different schools did he teach at, and roughly how many students did he work with over the years?
What exactly is he basing his claims on?
You know what they say—the grass is always greener on the neighbor's lawn. I used to think that was just a cliché until I moved into my current place. Every time I look over at the yard next door, it looks like something straight out of a professional landscaping magazine! It’s funny how we work ourselves up over things that seem perfect from the outside, isn't it? 😬

Quincy:

I haven't seen any posts from you yet! Looking forward to hearing what you have to say. kaže: That’s exactly why I keep bringing up family therapy instead of just focusing on temporary isolation.

What exactly are you basing that claim about guaranteed efficiency on?
Family dynamics aren't going to shift overnight, and honestly, it feels like it could be a long time before we see real progress. In some households, things are so deeply rooted that change seems almost impossible. This often leads to children being sidelined or isolated from the rest of the family, which can be heartbreaking. I’ve seen cases where this isolation actually backfires, making a child's behavior or emotional reactions even more difficult to manage. It really makes you wonder: what are we supposed to do for those kids caught in the middle?
Does the school system actually have any patience left for kids like them? And more importantly, how much is left in the tank?

The one thing that really jumps out at me is the suspension.I just hope things don't end up like that here in the States.Family therapy can be such a game-changer when things feel a little off at home. It’s not just about fixing one specific problem; it’s more about looking at the whole picture and helping everyone communicate better. I remember a few years back, my own family went through a bit of a rough patch where we were all talking past each other instead of actually listening. We decided to try a few sessions with a counselor, and honestly, it helped us find our rhythm again. It’s really about building those stronger connections so everyone feels heard.Let others deal with them.What exactly should teachers be looking for, and what tools do they actually need to succeed? Beyond that, I’ve been thinking lately about what the true role of a school should be in a student's life. Is it just about the curriculum, or is there something deeper going on?
I can't shake the feeling that this recommendation is actually a way to push problematic kids aside. It feels like the underlying goal is to get them out of the classroom entirely so the teachers can just focus on the curriculum in peace. It’s almost as if they want to minimize their presence in school just so the rest of the class isn't interrupted.

Can I? Seriously, can I? Is this actually possible?
Educators have specific duties mandated by the Department of Education, which include delivering the curriculum, grading assignments, and implementing disciplinary measures. In my view, a school should primarily function as an educational institution; any focus on character building can only be applied in a very limited capacity.
What is the true purpose of school? It feels like Congress and the Department of Education can’t reach a consensus, and parents aren't exactly helping bridge the gap either. On one hand, lawmakers want schools to be these idyllic sanctuaries where children soak up knowledge—which happens, to an extent—while teachers diligently follow curricula that were essentially designed decades ago. On the other hand, when challenges arise, teachers find ways to adapt, which is exactly what they should be doing. But there's a catch. If they don't strictly adhere to the syllabus, they're considered failing. If they don't devote themselves to every single child, they're failing. If they focus too much on one student, they're accused of neglecting the rest. It ends up feeling like Sisyphus pushing a boulder up a hill, or more accurately, a job defined by impossible paradoxes that simply cannot be satisfied all at once.
If we truly want to focus on raising our children properly, then it’s time to move past the obsession with grades and rigid lectures. We should be spending quality time with them—grabbing a coffee, just talking, and actually connecting. If schools are going to maintain their core purpose of providing an education, they need students who are socially adjusted and ready to learn. Right now, we're seeing kids who act like they own the place, constantly disrupting the flow of class and, in their free time, basically terrorizing their peers.
With all this criticism directed at teachers regarding how they handle unruly students or general chaos in the classroom, I haven’t seen a single concrete proposal for what should actually be done. It’s always just "this needs to happen" or "that should change," which is completely impossible to implement in a real-world setting. The fundamental issue with these so-called "disciplinary measures" is that they are being drafted by people who think they know how to handle kids, yet they’ve never actually stepped foot in a classroom. They’ve jumped straight into politics instead, where they can sit around offering unsolicited advice while ignoring a reality that is far more brutal than they care to admit.
Suspensions, removals, and other measures that distance troublemakers from the center of the community are valid solutions. It forces these kids to face serious "either-or" decisions: either they change their ways, or they face the consequences—like losing the right to attend high school or being stuck repeating the same grade indefinitely. Eventually, circumstances might force them to realize that this behavior simply isn't sustainable. It might work for some, and it might not work for others, but as you pointed out, that’s a separate issue entirely. We shouldn't let one disruptive student jeopardize the entire environment for everyone else. Besides, not everyone is going to be an Albert Einstein. Some people need to learn how to hold down a blue-collar job, otherwise, they'll end up turning to crime—which, unfortunately, seems to be quite the trend these days.

Susan James said:Quincy:

I haven't seen any posts from you yet! If you have something on your mind or just want to jump into the conversation, feel free to share. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts! kaže: I was chatting with a colleague who used to teach over there, and he mentioned that things have actually improved quite a bit. It sounds like the situation is incomparably better than it used to be.

What does "incomparably better" actually mean?
How many different schools did he teach at, and roughly how many students did he work with over the years?
What exactly is he basing his claims on?
You know what they say—the grass is always greener on the neighbor's lawn. I used to think that was just a cliché until I moved into my current place. Every time I look over at the yard next door, it looks like something straight out of a professional landscaping magazine! It’s funny how we work ourselves up over things that seem perfect from the outside, isn't it? 😬

Quincy:

I haven't seen any posts from you yet! Looking forward to hearing what you have to say. kaže: That’s exactly why I keep bringing up family therapy instead of just focusing on temporary isolation.

What exactly are you basing that claim about guaranteed efficiency on?
Family dynamics aren't going to shift overnight, and honestly, it feels like it could be a long time before we see real progress. In some households, things are so deeply rooted that change seems almost impossible. This often leads to children being sidelined or isolated from the rest of the family, which can be heartbreaking. I’ve seen cases where this isolation actually backfires, making a child's behavior or emotional reactions even more difficult to manage. It really makes you wonder: what are we supposed to do for those kids caught in the middle?
Does the school system actually have any patience left for kids like them? And more importantly, how much is left in the tank?

The one thing that really jumps out at me is the suspension.I just hope things don't end up like that here in the States.Family therapy can be such a game-changer when things feel a little off at home. It’s not just about fixing one specific problem; it’s more about looking at the whole picture and helping everyone communicate better. I remember a few years back, my own family went through a bit of a rough patch where we were all talking past each other instead of actually listening. We decided to try a few sessions with a counselor, and honestly, it helped us find our rhythm again. It’s really about building those stronger connections so everyone feels heard.Let others deal with them.What exactly should teachers be looking for, and what tools do they actually need to succeed? Beyond that, I’ve been thinking lately about what the true role of a school should be in a student's life. Is it just about the curriculum, or is there something deeper going on?
I can't shake the feeling that this recommendation is actually a way to push problematic kids aside. It feels like the underlying goal is to get them out of the classroom entirely so the teachers can just focus on the curriculum in peace. It’s almost as if they want to minimize their presence in school just so the rest of the class isn't interrupted.

Shouldn't a school be a safe haven where a parent can drop off their sixth grader without worrying they'll get jumped by an eighth grader?

Shouldn't students with severe behavioral disorders be handled by professionals specifically trained for that level of intervention? As it stands, it sounds like we're expecting teachers to moonlight as family therapists.

Ultimately, they expect one teacher to act as a surrogate parent, a psychologist, a security guard, and an educator all at once. It's absurd.

Emily Gonzalez51 said:Shouldn't a school be a safe haven where a parent can drop off their sixth grader without worrying they'll get jumped by an eighth grader?

Shouldn't students with severe behavioral disorders be handled by professionals specifically trained for that level of intervention? As it stands, it sounds like we're expecting teachers to moonlight as family therapists.

Ultimately, they expect one teacher to act as a surrogate parent, a psychologist, a security guard, and an educator all at once. It's absurd.

What exactly led you to that conclusion?
I never said that, and I don't think anyone in their right mind expects you to provide psychotherapy.

A serious behavioral disorder doesn't just appear overnight in eighth grade. That kid has been through seventh grade too—what were the teachers doing during that time?

My question is, do you really feel like there is nothing you can do to help reduce violence while the kids are under your roof?
How are you actually preventing violence from happening, or is everything truly left to the specialists in the building who, based on your experience, just sit around drinking coffee in the lounge?

And how many suspensions for a single student can we actually tolerate? What happens if nothing changes during that suspension period?
You still haven't answered whether you would actually take a student back into the classroom after a month-long suspension.

Yes, school needs to be a safe place. As a parent, I feel incredibly uneasy knowing there are about 50 helpless adults in that building whose only "disciplinary measures" within their institution are calling security, using cameras, or handing out suspensions... people who only know what everyone else *isn't* doing and what everyone else *should* be doing.🙄

Based on that description, the school sounds like a very dangerous place to me.😳

Susan James said:What exactly led you to that conclusion?
I never said that, and I don't think anyone in their right mind expects you to provide psychotherapy.

A serious behavioral disorder doesn't just appear overnight in eighth grade. That kid has been through seventh grade too—what were the teachers doing during that time?

My question is, do you really feel like there is nothing you can do to help reduce violence while the kids are under your roof?
How are you actually preventing violence from happening, or is everything truly left to the specialists in the building who, based on your experience, just sit around drinking coffee in the lounge?

And how many suspensions for a single student can we actually tolerate? What happens if nothing changes during that suspension period?
You still haven't answered whether you would actually take a student back into the classroom after a month-long suspension.

Yes, school needs to be a safe place. As a parent, I feel incredibly uneasy knowing there are about 50 helpless adults in that building whose only "disciplinary measures" within their institution are calling security, using cameras, or handing out suspensions... people who only know what everyone else *isn't* doing and what everyone else *should* be doing.🙄

Based on that description, the school sounds like a very dangerous place to me.😳

☕ ? That approach has consistently proven to be a total failure, actually, more like a complete disaster.

I don't have much energy for a long rant since I'm exhausted, but here's the bottom line:

Two suspensions, followed by placement in a juvenile detention center or a specialized rehab facility.

If they can actually manage to socialize properly, then maybe—just maybe—they can head back to school.

As for everything else, does the fact that one in four American kids is a victim of bullying really need more explanation?

Hey everyone. Been gone for a bit. This topic is still relevant, and I see things are starting to drift toward the theories held by Baron. Let me offer a different perspective based on what I actually observe—for those who aren't just following the "enlightened" crowd. Our school system is stuck in the 19th century. It’s just a teacher standing at a chalkboard lecturing kids sitting in rows. We’re living in the 21st century; things need to change. Most of the European Union and other developed nations have already started reforming. Think about this: kids entering school today won't retire until roughly 2068 for women or 2073 for men, if everything goes according to plan. Now, try telling me how our current education prepares them for jobs starting in 2028. What are we actually teaching them? What are we filling their heads with? A few contradictions come to mind. Math from seventh grade through high school is mostly a pile of impractical nonsense—math that has zero application in the real world. History? Just a massive list of dates and figures that won't put food on their tables between 2028 and 2073. Geography? Aside from basic concepts they actually need, it’s filled with useless trivia, like the specific GDP of Bulgaria or the fact that India is a major producer of sweet potatoes. Who cares? Our schools are relics. Kids are being force-fed useless info via old-school, face-to-face lectures. Naturally, this makes them lose all interest in school or most subjects. In the age of Google, where any fact is available in milliseconds, why are we making kids memorize the GDP of Bulgaria? We ignore the fact that data printed in a textbook five years ago is already obsolete, yet we still slap it on a test as if it’s gospel. Maybe you think I'm talking nonsense. Check out these three links regarding this issue:

http://youtu.be/t4qV0j5l1qo

http://youtu.be/HV2JtF0sL-o

http://youtu.be/tJBj1lag8bE

Bottom line: the school system needs an urgent overhaul.
As for who should be responsible for raising children and maintaining order in the classroom? Maybe the best solution would be for parents to sit next to their kids in class, holding their hands, so teachers can actually teach in peace. I constantly hear "you can't do this" or "you aren't allowed to do that," when half the time it's just a lack of will. Stop saying you "can't" and finally build the kind of school you’d actually want for yourselves. I was taught from a young age that there isn't a problem that can't be solved. But when you ask people how *they* would solve something, it's always excuses: "the system won't let us," "the kids are the problem," "the parents are the problem." It's all just finger-pointing. I just want my kid to have a safe environment and attend classes without disruption. That's it. I'm asking you to make sure that happens within the system. I don't care how you do it. I don't care which part of the bureaucracy is stopping you. Fix the system, fix yourselves, fix the kids, and start solving problems. That's all I want.
Best regards,

Jessica Howard5 said:Hey everyone. Been gone for a bit. This topic is still relevant, and I see things are starting to drift toward the theories held by Baron. Let me offer a different perspective based on what I actually observe—for those who aren't just following the "enlightened" crowd. Our school system is stuck in the 19th century. It’s just a teacher standing at a chalkboard lecturing kids sitting in rows. We’re living in the 21st century; things need to change. Most of the European Union and other developed nations have already started reforming. Think about this: kids entering school today won't retire until roughly 2068 for women or 2073 for men, if everything goes according to plan. Now, try telling me how our current education prepares them for jobs starting in 2028. What are we actually teaching them? What are we filling their heads with? A few contradictions come to mind. Math from seventh grade through high school is mostly a pile of impractical nonsense—math that has zero application in the real world. History? Just a massive list of dates and figures that won't put food on their tables between 2028 and 2073. Geography? Aside from basic concepts they actually need, it’s filled with useless trivia, like the specific GDP of Bulgaria or the fact that India is a major producer of sweet potatoes. Who cares? Our schools are relics. Kids are being force-fed useless info via old-school, face-to-face lectures. Naturally, this makes them lose all interest in school or most subjects. In the age of Google, where any fact is available in milliseconds, why are we making kids memorize the GDP of Bulgaria? We ignore the fact that data printed in a textbook five years ago is already obsolete, yet we still slap it on a test as if it’s gospel. Maybe you think I'm talking nonsense. Check out these three links regarding this issue:

http://youtu.be/t4qV0j5l1qo

http://youtu.be/HV2JtF0sL-o

http://youtu.be/tJBj1lag8bE

Bottom line: the school system needs an urgent overhaul.
As for who should be responsible for raising children and maintaining order in the classroom? Maybe the best solution would be for parents to sit next to their kids in class, holding their hands, so teachers can actually teach in peace. I constantly hear "you can't do this" or "you aren't allowed to do that," when half the time it's just a lack of will. Stop saying you "can't" and finally build the kind of school you’d actually want for yourselves. I was taught from a young age that there isn't a problem that can't be solved. But when you ask people how *they* would solve something, it's always excuses: "the system won't let us," "the kids are the problem," "the parents are the problem." It's all just finger-pointing. I just want my kid to have a safe environment and attend classes without disruption. That's it. I'm asking you to make sure that happens within the system. I don't care how you do it. I don't care which part of the bureaucracy is stopping you. Fix the system, fix yourselves, fix the kids, and start solving problems. That's all I want.
Best regards,

I’ve gone ahead and watched all three of your links—thoroughly. There is absolutely no doubt they serve as excellent fodder for thought and debate—but, if we are being honest, that probably warrants its own entirely separate thread regarding the "school of the future" (or perhaps just "school and its future"). To be blunt—and I mean this without any apologetic tone—if one doesn't view these clips through a purely worshipful lens, where every single sentence uttered is treated like some divine commandment, there are plenty of points within them that invite serious pushback. There is quite a bit of show business, frankly—self-promotion, elitism, a certain distortion of reality, an over-idealization of children, and various other theatrics.

But, as I said, I will set that aside for a moment—what is actually interesting here is that these videos don't actually support your argument for knowledge that is primarily "practical" or "applicable to real-world scenarios." The common thread running through all these presentations is creativity—and creativity, by its very nature, isn't particularly aimed at day-to-day practicality or utility. Every speaker seems to be fixated on art (and let's face it, if there is no practicality or way to put bread on the table, there isn't much to be found in art)—and I'm certainly not convinced that's the direction we would head in if you were handed those famous five minutes of power.

(traditional setup—chalkboard, chalk, teacher, and students in desks)

First off, we live in a physical space, in real time, dealing with a very real (and often insufficient) amount of money. But more importantly, neither the chalkboard, nor the chalk, nor the desks are truly the issue here: a talented and motivated teacher can perform miracles even if they're teaching under an oak tree out in a field.

Math from seventh grade through senior year of high school is just a mountain of impractical nonsense.

To navigate "real-world spheres," one needs slightly more than four basic arithmetic operations—though I suppose that would make people literate enough.

However, high school (particularly a prep school or academy) also has the task of preparing students for college. Which specific areas taught in high school are truly useless or senseless for any technical degree? (I realize, I know—not everyone goes into STEM—but shouldn't we be auditing the other disciplines too?)

Are we really teaching kids what the GDP of Bulgaria is?

I partially agree with this: in the social sciences, there is far too much emphasis on rote memorization of facts rather than interpretation and synthesis. That said, the GDP of Bulgaria or the price of potatoes in India aren't irrelevant: that GDP is the result of specific events, a driver of subsequent events—these are things people ought to understand if they don't want to be mere sheep.
Quote:Then why don't you just change it once and for all and finally create the kind of school you would actually want?Teachers don't actually "create" the school.

While they might have a tiny bit of room for initiative—which, let's be honest, most of them rarely bother to use—they are essentially just "contracted labor" for the government. Their job is simply to execute whatever specific tasks the state mandates.

Since I was a kid, I've been taught that there isn't a single problem out there that can't be solved.

Fine, then here’s a problem for you to solve: in some tiny village somewhere, there’s a barber named Pablo who shaves everyone who doesn't shave themselves. The dilemma: who shaves Pablo? 😁

I am politely asking you all to ensure that happens within the system. How you manage to pull it off is none of my concern.

If I haven't misremembered your background, you're an economist. So, how would you react if you were working at a factory that produces "glip-glops"—those useless little plastic trinkets nobody wants—and your boss walks in and says, "We're down a billion dollars; I want you to sell three million glip-glops so we can turn a billion-dollar profit—how you make that happen is entirely up to you"?

Look, I’ve got a few thoughts here. Just to be clear, I’m not playing apologist. I know perfectly well that God isn't omnipotent—He can't go around making stones so heavy He can't lift them himself. But still, there are a few things He *can* do that don't require any of that apologetic nonsense.
I watched all three links you posted. They’re useful food for thought, sure—but if we’re actually going to debate this, we need a separate thread dedicated to the future of education. Look, if you don't approach these videos like they're gospel, there’s plenty of room for argument. It’s heavy on the show business, self-promotion, and elitism. There's a lot of fake reality mixed in with over-idealizing kids and all sorts of other nonsense. Let's be real about it.

Look, I'll let this one slide. But here’s the thing: none of these arguments actually support your obsession with "practical," "real-world" knowledge. The common thread through all these presentations is creativity—and creativity isn't exactly known for being practical or useful in daily life. Every single speaker keeps drifting back to art. And let's be real: if there's no practical application or way to make a buck, it isn't art. If I were handed those famous five minutes of power to run a school, I certainly wouldn't be heading in this direction.
Elementary school needs a massive overhaul. Right now, the curriculum is a one-size-fits-all trap for every kid walking through the doors, unless they’re already flagged for special education. Let’s talk about the "standard" students first. For most kids, the material being shoved down their throats from first through eighth grade is completely age-inappropriate. It's poorly paced. And here's the kicker: the administration and the specialists have zero interest in carving out space for the gifted kids. They won't bother creating specialized tracks to nurture natural talent or high intelligence because there isn't an official IOC designation for them. It's absurd. Under current laws, if a specialist determines a child has a disability, they get an IOC immediately. But if a kid is just incredibly advanced, they're stuck in the same mediocre lane as everyone else. Schools should be doing more than just offering some after-school clubs to keep talented kids busy. We need actual IOC-style tracks for gifted students—expanding the curriculum in subjects they excel at, while scaling back the workload in subjects where they struggle. Starting in fifth grade, we should stop forcing every single kid into the exact same classroom schedule. Let them choose their path based on where they actually shine. That way, nobody loses.

Look, let’s get real for a second. We live in the real world, in real time, dealing with a very real lack of funding. But honestly? That’s not even the main point. Chalkboards, whiteboards, desks—none of that matters. A truly great, driven teacher can pull off miracles even if they're teaching under an oak tree in a park.

Yeah, we’ve always had this habit of expecting everything to just fall into our laps, thinking someone else is going to swoop in and fix our problems. If we were living in a different era, I might buy what you're saying, but looking at things objectively? That argument is totally dead. Now that the door is wide open—and it’s a very real opportunity if you actually put in the work—to grab federal grants and various stimulus funds, the old excuses don't fly. There are literally funds specifically earmarked to upgrade standards in elementary and high schools. But sure, let's just invent some imaginary barrier instead. My school actually stepped up. We got AC installed in the classrooms, added lockers for the kids, and moved away from that outdated one-way teaching style. And we didn't do it through magic; we did it by recycling paper, collecting PET bottles, using money from the student cooperative, and taking donations from us parents. Could the kids survive without it? Probably. But if we can equip them properly with actual learning tools, why wouldn't we? As for your point about "good, motivated teachers"—it’s a moot point. Even the ones who start out with a spark quickly get sucked into the gray mediocrity of the system. You join a collective like that, and pretty soon, someone is standing over you telling you to just blend in and stop trying.

To deal with "real life," you need more than just basic arithmetic to actually be literate.
That said, high school (especially prep schools) is supposed to get kids ready for college. So, which subjects taught in high school are totally useless and mindless for any technical major? (Look, I know not everyone goes into STEM—but we should at least look at the other paths too).

Let’s break it down. If I list the types of high schools you find in a city like Chicago, the answer is right there in the names. You’ve got general prep, language academies, math academies, arts schools, science academies, vocational schools for construction, electrical, metalwork, graphic design, food tech, medical, hospitality, trade, agriculture, textile, Jesuit prep, private academies... hope I didn't miss one. Why does a kid in a language academy have to slog through an intense physics, chemistry, and math curriculum when they signed up specifically for languages? There are other specialized schools for that. Will a linguist be screwed if they can't calculate derivatives or integrals? Will they ever need that in their lives? Even the math academy, which has a heavier math and physics load compared to the language track, still forces students to learn the exact same chemistry and biology as the science academy kids... It's total nonsense.

I partially agree here: social studies tends to obsess over rote memorization instead of interpretation and synthesis. However, things like Bulgaria's GDP or Indian sweet potatoes aren't irrelevant: that GDP is the result of certain events, a driver for future ones—that's stuff people need to understand if they don't want to be sheep.

I don't feel like a sheep because I don't know Bulgaria's GDP or who the top producer of sweet potatoes is. Sure, at some point in their education, kids need to be taught what GDP is, how it's calculated, and its characteristics. But teaching it in a geography class by just reciting textbook stats is completely misplaced; it's meaningless in that context. And regarding the sweet potato thing—India had a drought and production tanked, so this year Bangladesh is the top producer. So yeah, I think those specific facts are stupid. Instead of teaching kids trivia, we should teach them what can be produced right here in America and how. Though, our country hasn't even figured that out yet—and if it does, it'll be some other vague entity doing it, not our kids.

Teachers don't "make the school."
Teachers have some room for initiative (which they usually don't use), but they are essentially "contract labor" for the State, which tells them exactly what to do and how to do it.

Now we're back to being "vague," like you mentioned in one of your posts. Everyone knows everything, but the problem is for someone else to solve, just not me.

Fine, here's a problem for you to solve: In a small Spanish village, there’s a barber named Pablo who shaves everyone who doesn't shave themselves. Problem: who shaves Pablo the barber?

Enrique from the next village over shaves him.

If I remember correctly, you're an economist. How would you react if you worked at a factory making plastic trinkets (useless pieces of junk nobody buys) and your boss walked in and said, "We're down a billion dollars; I want you to sell three million of these trinkets so we hit a billion in profit—figure it out, I don't care how"?

See, there you go. Believe me, there are way more situations like that in my industry than you think. I know from personal experience and from colleagues in other firms. But you and these kinds of problems *get* solved. Trust me, every product has a buyer; you just have to find the market. You also have to look at that useless piece of plastic and see if it can be repurposed or integrated into a better product. Basically, you have to think—how many ways can a paperclip be used? That's the magic of being in sales, and that's what separates the good pros from the bad ones. Of course, if I truly had no clue where to sell a million trinkets, I'd just ask Google; ultimately, it would know.

If I’m remembering right, you’re an economist. How would you handle being stuck at some factory making useless plastic trinkets that nobody wants, when your boss walks in and says, "We're down a billion dollars. I want you to sell three million of these junk pieces so we break even plus a billion—I don't care how you pull it off, just make it happen"?

Fine, here’s a real solution for your "trinkets" that nobody buys. I’d take the scrap and turn it into regrind, then pitch it to a major packaging manufacturer like Berry Global. I’d negotiate a price for the regrind and demand a quote from them for finished containers in return. A straight barter. Then, I’d take those same containers to a company like ExxonMobil and offer them as packaging for their lubricants in exchange for an equal value of product. From there, I’d move that finished product—lubricant in containers—to industrial farmers, say dairy producers, offering them a fair deal where they trade their milk production to offset the cost of the lubricant. Finally, I’d collect my cash from their buyer—the big dairy processing plants that are already paying farmers in cash anyway. That way, I’ve cleared out the useless inventory, turned it into liquid cash, and kept the boss happy. If I had used that same money to just keep churning out more worthless trinkets, I’d quit immediately, head to the stock exchange, and suggest the boss check himself into a psychiatric ward.

Obviously, they didn't teach this in elementary school, high school, or even college. This is just pure instinct and talent. Just looking at a problem and thinking, "Everything is fixable," and letting the idea hit me whenever it feels like it.
The point is, anything can be solved, even getting rid of junk that nobody needs.

I think our American education system has piled up just as much useless "junk" as that story describes. And I believe it can be fixed too. But unlike my boss, who throws a specific problem in my face and demands a solution, everyone in the education system thinks someone else is responsible for fixing the actual issues. They claim it's not in their job description. My problems are measured by economic metrics and don't affect society at large, but the failures in education impact the entire country—yet the people running the schools aren't held to any real, effective standards of performance. It's all just vague nonsense.

Paul Wilson72 said:Can I? Seriously, can I? Is this actually possible?
Educators have specific duties mandated by the Department of Education, which include delivering the curriculum, grading assignments, and implementing disciplinary measures. In my view, a school should primarily function as an educational institution; any focus on character building can only be applied in a very limited capacity.
What is the true purpose of school? It feels like Congress and the Department of Education can’t reach a consensus, and parents aren't exactly helping bridge the gap either. On one hand, lawmakers want schools to be these idyllic sanctuaries where children soak up knowledge—which happens, to an extent—while teachers diligently follow curricula that were essentially designed decades ago. On the other hand, when challenges arise, teachers find ways to adapt, which is exactly what they should be doing. But there's a catch. If they don't strictly adhere to the syllabus, they're considered failing. If they don't devote themselves to every single child, they're failing. If they focus too much on one student, they're accused of neglecting the rest. It ends up feeling like Sisyphus pushing a boulder up a hill, or more accurately, a job defined by impossible paradoxes that simply cannot be satisfied all at once.
If we truly want to focus on raising our children properly, then it’s time to move past the obsession with grades and rigid lectures. We should be spending quality time with them—grabbing a coffee, just talking, and actually connecting. If schools are going to maintain their core purpose of providing an education, they need students who are socially adjusted and ready to learn. Right now, we're seeing kids who act like they own the place, constantly disrupting the flow of class and, in their free time, basically terrorizing their peers.
With all this criticism directed at teachers regarding how they handle unruly students or general chaos in the classroom, I haven’t seen a single concrete proposal for what should actually be done. It’s always just "this needs to happen" or "that should change," which is completely impossible to implement in a real-world setting. The fundamental issue with these so-called "disciplinary measures" is that they are being drafted by people who think they know how to handle kids, yet they’ve never actually stepped foot in a classroom. They’ve jumped straight into politics instead, where they can sit around offering unsolicited advice while ignoring a reality that is far more brutal than they care to admit.
Suspensions, removals, and other measures that distance troublemakers from the center of the community are valid solutions. It forces these kids to face serious "either-or" decisions: either they change their ways, or they face the consequences—like losing the right to attend high school or being stuck repeating the same grade indefinitely. Eventually, circumstances might force them to realize that this behavior simply isn't sustainable. It might work for some, and it might not work for others, but as you pointed out, that’s a separate issue entirely. We shouldn't let one disruptive student jeopardize the entire environment for everyone else. Besides, not everyone is going to be an Albert Einstein. Some people need to learn how to hold down a blue-collar job, otherwise, they'll end up turning to crime—which, unfortunately, seems to be quite the trend these days.

Alright, my turn. Again. I'll say it again: school needs to be a safe place. It needs to be a place for character building, sure, but also for education. Let's break it down.
Character building starts the second a kid is born. Fact. Some parents get it and they're able to do it; some get it but choose not to; some don't get it but try anyway; and some just don't get it and can't do it regardless. Most of them fall into that last category. Most parents drop their kids off at daycare first, and then later, they go to school.
By the time kids hit daycare, the staff already knows exactly what kind of parents they're dealing with and what kind of home life the child has. With most kids, you can already see if they're deviating from social norms. In daycare, kids are supposed to learn how to be socialized, how to function in a group, how friendship works, and that actions have consequences—whether it's a reward or a penalty. With good professional work involving both the kids and the parents, you can actually achieve a lot.
We need laws to handle the people who just refuse to cooperate. Once they actually understand the legal consequences, they can decide if they still don't want to comply. That would make fixing failures in upbringing much faster and easier.
The same logic should apply to elementary schools. We need clear rules and legal frameworks in place so that we parents aren't left guessing—we’ll just have to adapt to the law and the system.
For those who stubbornly refuse, the law needs to go all the way—like it already does in certain extreme cases—and strip them of parental rights, mandate vasectomies, and basically ban them from churning out more problems. If you couldn't manage to raise one or two kids properly, you shouldn't be allowed to produce six. This might sound a bit Nazi or clash with religious views, but that's the reality.
On the flip side, look at foster care facilities where kids without parents are placed under the care of professionals doing it as a job. Those kids usually finish school and turn out to be decent, well-behaved people.
Why not build similar closed institutions for kids with deviant behavior? We have countless empty rural school buildings sitting idle. With minimal investment and some renovations, those could become centers for rehabilitation and education for these violent kids and vandals. Through schooling and vocational therapy, we could get them on the right track and give them actual skills for life. These facilities would employ guards, security, educators, and specialists...
Regular schools need to be freed from these types, while giving these kids a chance to get an education and undergo rehabilitation.
All of this needs to be codified by law. Many of these kids would be saved; many would escape toxic environments and broken homes. Kids aren't to blame for being born to bad parents. The law is what must step in and regulate things for their benefit.

What’s your take on this?

It is highly probable that similar situations occur right here in America; they just aren't publicized and don't involve the police.

Emily Gonzalez51 said:What’s your take on this?

It is highly probable that similar situations occur right here in America; they just aren't publicized and don't involve the police.

It’s just classic American stupidity.

If they hadn't been so blindly following protocol, maybe someone actually involved would have faced any consequences—but instead, they caused serious harm to a six-year-old kid, and nobody cares.

Emily Gonzalez51 said:What’s your take on this?

It is highly probable that similar situations occur right here in America; they just aren't publicized and don't involve the police.

Oh, it happens all the time. It just doesn't get labeled as police misconduct. I actually witnessed a similar meltdown back in 2001. I was dropping my kid off at daycare, and the little guy starts tossing jackets everywhere and kicking shoes around. A teacher is trying to hold him while he’s busy kicking another staff member in the shins. I went to step in, but they just brushed me off with a "No, no, we've got this handled."

If that had hit the news, the mom would be playing the victim, and the dad—some PTSP-ovac wearing the same cross around his neck—would be shouting, "Is this what I fought for?" (Just to be clear, I was in the National Guard back in '91.)

The only thing that surprises me is why the video didn't feature some Black American pop star screaming about how this is blatant brutality against African Americans...

Jessica Howard5 said:Oh, it happens all the time. It just doesn't get labeled as police misconduct. I actually witnessed a similar meltdown back in 2001. I was dropping my kid off at daycare, and the little guy starts tossing jackets everywhere and kicking shoes around. A teacher is trying to hold him while he’s busy kicking another staff member in the shins. I went to step in, but they just brushed me off with a "No, no, we've got this handled."

If that had hit the news, the mom would be playing the victim, and the dad—some PTSP-ovac wearing the same cross around his neck—would be shouting, "Is this what I fought for?" (Just to be clear, I was in the National Guard back in '91.)

The only thing that surprises me is why the video didn't feature some Black American pop star screaming about how this is blatant brutality against African Americans...

So, what exactly were you trying to do?

Nicholas King said:So, what exactly were you trying to do?

Look, I just wanted some help from the babysitters to get the kid under control. I wasn't thinking about the fallout or what would happen next—it was just pure instinct. I saw how much they were struggling and just wanted him to settle down. Once I actually stepped back and thought about it, I realized what the sitters were trying to tell me. It was a pretty ugly scene, honestly. And by the way, that kid is still a nightmare. He’s still throwing tantrums, only now the consequences are way worse because he's older. He's in 8th grade now.

Jessica Howard5 said:Look, I just wanted some help from the babysitters to get the kid under control. I wasn't thinking about the fallout or what would happen next—it was just pure instinct. I saw how much they were struggling and just wanted him to settle down. Once I actually stepped back and thought about it, I realized what the sitters were trying to tell me. It was a pretty ugly scene, honestly. And by the way, that kid is still a nightmare. He’s still throwing tantrums, only now the consequences are way worse because he's older. He's in 8th grade now.

That’s what I finally came to realize.

I just wanted to take the edge off his attitude a little bit—nothing more, really. Because—and I really mean this—it was clearly quite an ordeal for the lady.

How exactly?

And honestly—that little guy is still causing headaches today, too...

Maybe—and I'm just speculating here—if the whole daycare situation had been handled differently from the jump, we wouldn't be facing this massive headache right now. It feels like there was a much more logical way to navigate those childcare arrangements, but instead, everything was left to chance. If they had just sat down and planned for the inevitable gaps in coverage, things might have actually gone smoothly. But no, it seems like the approach taken was far from ideal, and frankly, it’s no wonder we’re dealing with these complications today.

Nicholas King said:That’s what I finally came to realize.

I just wanted to take the edge off his attitude a little bit—nothing more, really. Because—and I really mean this—it was clearly quite an ordeal for the lady.

How exactly?

Honestly, I have no clue how to help them calm him down. And obviously, I wasn't talking about getting physical—I wanted to grab him and settle things, but look, I’m 6'3" and 240 lbs. I figured it would be easier for me than for some tiny 5'3", 130 lb daycare teacher.

And that's actually my point. The issue was flagged at the preschool way back when, but nothing was ever done to fix it. Why? I'm asking myself the same thing.

The kid is well on his way to becoming one of those headlines you see on the nightly news; it's just a matter of time.

Jessica Howard5 said:Honestly, I have no clue how to help them calm him down. And obviously, I wasn't talking about getting physical—I wanted to grab him and settle things, but look, I’m 6'3" and 240 lbs. I figured it would be easier for me than for some tiny 5'3", 130 lb daycare teacher.

And that's actually my point. The issue was flagged at the preschool way back when, but nothing was ever done to fix it. Why? I'm asking myself the same thing.

The kid is well on his way to becoming one of those headlines you see on the nightly news; it's just a matter of time.

Are you thinking of that group from the recent news report out of Miami?

And honestly, we see stories like this popping up constantly. That's just what makes the headlines—it doesn't even account for all the incidents that never get reported. At this point, the school district (or even the government) should probably be providing liability insurance for teachers to cover any damages caused by these kinds of lunatics.

Paul Wilson72 said:Are you thinking of that group from the recent news report out of Miami?

And honestly, we see stories like this popping up constantly. That's just what makes the headlines—it doesn't even account for all the incidents that never get reported. At this point, the school district (or even the government) should probably be providing liability insurance for teachers to cover any damages caused by these kinds of lunatics.

My take? Put them in a closed facility with integrated schooling and vocational therapy. Once they finish their program and get their credentials, then they can get lost and head back out into the real world.

Jessica Howard5 said:My take? Put them in a closed facility with integrated schooling and vocational therapy. Once they finish their program and get their credentials, then they can get lost and head back out into the real world.

Honestly, I think every teacher and every victim of these kinds of students would be 100% on board with that proposal... ☕