Schools have a mystique about them among many parents because teachers accomplish things with children that non-educators can’t fathom or even grasp the degree of their influence on their children. Teachers, some believe, have techniques and skills with which they work wonders on children, much as surgeons work mysterious wonders in an operating room.
In order to maintain the myth and mystique, school boards remain quiet about matters that parents should know about. Teachers, concerned about maintaining their primary source of income, stay mum as well.
Since, legally, teachers function with authority similar to that of parents (teachers act in loco parentae), it makes sense that teachers and parents should be on the same page with respect to the development of the children they grow.
As a parent, grandparent or community-minded citizen, you deserve to know situations and conditions that may exist in schools in your neighborhood.
While the following are generalizations, meaning that there are many exceptions, there will be far more denials and claims of exceptions than real exceptions. These are some harsh truths about education.
1. In general, teachers do not work well together, in team teaching situations, for the collective benefit of students. Teachers traditionally have been sole masters or mistresses of their domains. They join together as team players for special events, but most prefer to work independently, with one teacher and one class of students.
Working together in team teaching situations requires teachers to each give up some of their autonomy, and to expose themselves, as professionals, to the scrutiny of their peers. In general, teachers don’t like that. Though they may be confident and competent, they dislike being judged or compared to other teachers by their peers.
Despite the fact that children might benefit from exposure to the strengths of two or more teachers in a team teaching situation, most kids experience both the weaknesses and the strengths of one teacher in one classroom at one time.
Teachers working together to pool their strengths benefits children. A teacher working as the lone adult in classroom makes teachers feel more secure.
2. School boards often do not give teachers enough training in new curriculum for the teacher to function competently and confidently. With an already heavy teaching load, teachers find new curriculum for which they are not well prepared added stress. Sometimes new curriculum arrives as a thick book just before a school year begins or even in the middle of a year.
Communities expect teachers to work wonders with the development of children in their charge. School boards expect teachers to become instant experts on curriculum that the boards have not thought out far enough in advance to produce months ahead of time and train their teachers appropriately.
Often, new curriculum is added without removing old curriculum, meaning that teachers must force-feed children at an unsustainable rate for children to learn. This stresses both children and teachers.
3. Teachers often receive no new resources or money with which to purchase supplies or resources to support new curriculum. Sometimes new curriculum does not even include places where new resources may be purchased.
Commonly, old curriculum has poor resource support within a school, so teachers may use out of date materials, now-inappropriate stuff available in the school from times past, or they must scour the internet for material to provide for the curriculum needs of their students.
When they must resort to using the internet, legal considerations regarding copyright of material may not be accounted for. To secure material without infringing copyright, teachers may resort to a lecture style--teacher at the front, children listening at their seats--which young children find difficult to follow, meaning that some will miss the core of the lesson.
4. School boards assume that teachers who must teach multiple subjects, such as in the lower grades of elementary (grade) school, can be competent and effective with all of them. This doesn’t make sense. It stands to reason that each teacher will have subject weaknesses, such as the inability to carry a tune in music, underdeveloped art skills, a poor understanding of skills needed for physical education or even a lack of understanding of how children learn mathematics. Neither teachers’ colleges nor curriculum address these deficiencies. Teachers are not taught enough.
School boards and districts make assumptions and presumptions about both teachers and children that simply could not be supported by evidence with real people in the classroom.
5. Teachers find discipline uncomfortable because they feel at risk from parents who disagree with whatever methods of punishment or retribution they chose. Traditional forms of punishment such as beating with a strap, standing in a corner facing the wall, shouting abuse or wearing of a dunce cap have no place in today’s schools. Yet neither do bullying, drugs, students abusing teachers or students carrying weapons.
When parents hear how one errant student has been disciplined, they may incorrectly assume that all misbehaving children are treated alike. In practice, methods of discipline vary with the child and with the offence, as they should.
How to manage an errant child creates stress and even fear in some teachers. Panic attacks and hyperventilation among teachers, events unknown to students of the past, show themselves more often in today’s schools. No teacher wants to have to discipline a child. Discipline puts the teacher at greater risk than the student being disciplined.
6. Too often, school boards treat children as commodities on a production line, where the success of the teacher depends on the proven progress of the child in matters of intellectual development. What is best for a child (in total) may take lower priority than the child passing certain tests to determine progress against an arbitrary scale on which there may be little agreement among professionals. Quantity, rather than quality, dominates methods of evaluation in many jurisdictions. Final marks may be adjusted according to a scale, rather than being recorded as raw data (actual marks on the tests).
7. Many teachers leave the profession within a few years, not because they dislike teaching, but because the stress is too much to bear. Stress breeds fear. For example, some school boards require teachers to administer medications to children with allergies or hyperactivity disorder and the teachers may be held legally liable for any errors that may occur while they also tend to the constant needs of 30 other children. The average teaching career in the United States lasts five years.
8. It’s not easier to manage 25 to 35 children in a classroom than two of your own children at home. Teachers don’t wield magic, they use techniques they have been taught or that they have learned through experience. If those techniques are not in line with what children have learned at home, the kids may falter or even fall back in their development. Standards of expectations of children at home may differ from those at school, in which case the children tend to favor the one that enforces less responsibility and costs less work. While children lose in those circumstances, teachers suffer frustration because different children in a classroom choose to work by different standards from each other. Teachers find themselves in a losing struggle to provide a level playing field for all children. Equality, yes, but by what standard?
9. Curriculum is set not according to the capacity of each child to learn, but according to how good the topics will look to other adults. Learning styles of children vary greatly, as do the speed at which they learn and the amount of new information and skills they are capable of absorbing in a given period of time. A child who learns slowly or not in a style that is compatible with the teaching style of the teacher, thus garnering low marks on class tests, may gain more knowledge and skills over a long period of time than the “average.” Yet the child may suffer humiliation while in school due to an undiagnosed disability and may endure accusations of laziness.
10. One of our basic needs is the need for touch. While touch is very important for people of all ages, it is especially important for the smooth development of children. Through touch, children can feel secure in an ever changing world. By the very nature of schooling, children’s lives change constantly. Touch allows them some comfort to know that they have a solid and dependable adult they can count on, someone who is with them throughout the day.
Parents can provide the soothing and comforting touch that children need while they are at home. Many school boards forbid teachers from touching children, for fear of litigation accusing their teachers of improper touching of children.
For fear of litigation, school boards insist that children fail to receive touch they may need at any given time during fully half of their waking hours. Some children thrive in this insecure environment. Some don’t, especially if they don’t get enough loving touch at home.
These factors each play a role in the dynamics of education in your community. Your children, grandchildren or neighbor’s children may survive and thrive in such a convoluted learning environment, but not all children do. Some can’t cope. In years to come, they become inmates in our prisons, residents in our mental hospitals, patients for a proliferating profession of therapists or gobblers of mood suppressing drugs.
No one denies that our children deserve the best possible education. It’s necessary that schools provide positive and helpful conditions for children who may be at risk of having problems coping with life later, as well as for well-adjusted children.
Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today’s Epidemic Social Problems, a book about child development and how schools don't address the full needs of children in their charge
The Writers’ Collective 2005
Learn more about the book and read much more about child development at http://billallin.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/turningitaround
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 57
To put the "discipline" problem simply, the old way of managing misbehaviour was to punish, which got the "problem" kids the attention they needed, though in a backwards kind of way. The old way of a teacher gaining respect was to demand it--a duty of children.
No kids wants to be bad, no kid wants to misbehave. What they have is needs that they don't know how to express in words, especially because we don't give them the words they need. Dogs and cats know how to get attention better than human kids.
Many teachers today know that they must earn the respect of their charges. They do that by addressing their needs as people--not by being a softie or through treats.
A kid sitting in a classroom with a few dozen other kids understands that he or she is devoting a large portion of their life to whatever happens in that room. If the child's social and emotional needs are not addressed, they will have trouble learning. A social disability or emotional underdevelopment is as serious a handicap as a learning difficulty.
Teachers, schools and school districts don't know that because no one has ever told them. That's what 'Turning It Around' does.
Parents don't know it either, for the same reason.
'Turning It Around' provides dozens of learning points for teachers and parents so they can be prepared to address the social and emotional development of their kids. No other book does the same job.
However, by keeping these matters secret from parents, teachers can't get the support they need to make the necessary changes. Parents hold the poower to change, if they know it and use it.
Secrets don't improve anything. Secrets are a symptom of ignorance (in this case, of parents) and ignorance has never improved anything, ever.
I think it is in everyone's best interest when the parents and the teacher's can work together. This doesn't always happen, some parents don't care what happens at school, some teachers don't want the parent's input, etc. But when teachers and parents are both trying to determine what's the best way to approach a child's issue, it can only benefit them all. And especially the child, who realizes that his education is a team effort.
Judi, there are almost no problems within education systems that could not be solved with greater transparency. School systems are often fiefdoms that superintendents (or equivalent) and directors would rather keep poor and ignorant (but totally within their control) than to open them up and make them work well.
The amazing thing is (to me, anyway) that the necessary changes and plans offered for implementation in 'Turning It Around' will cost almost nothing and will eventually save communities fortunes in taxes and health care costs that no longer need to be paid out for problem adults.
Your article makes many valid arguments, but the one thing I feel you should have also covered, but did not, was the negative, punative nature of No Child Left Behind, the brainchild of a president who himself is lacking an effective brain. Obviously, all teachers want their students to be successful, and students want to be successful as well. Unfortunately, the mandates and measurements, as well as the goals, of NCLB are very, very flawed, and districts are, in many cases, forced to "teach to the test" instead of teach the child. For example, one goal is to have all students read at grade level by 2014...just seven years from now. Is it a reasonable expectation, then, for a student, let's say, who has only been in this country for a year, and who speaks, reads, and writes very little English, to take a test written in English, and still score well? Is it fair for a special education student with limited mental capabilities to take the same test as those students who were in honors classes? Making sweeping demands like that totally ignores the individual needs, strengths, and weaknesses of each student. It's like telling a quadraplegic that he has to get out of his wheelchair and run the 50-yard dash, or he will not "meet or exceed" standards, and be considered a "failure." Instead of measuring individual goals and progress, students are shoved into academic "cubbyholes" so scores can be better! Would it not make more sense to measure the progress of a student with valid instruments that truly measures that individual child's progress? Would it not make more sense to compare each student's progress individually each year instead of comparing this year's juniors to last year's juniors to measure growth? We're not even measuring the same thing! And, to add insult to injury, if schools don't meet the requirements of NCLB, the federal government spends even less money on its already underfunded program, and expects everyone to make more progress with less training and fewer resources.
The last group of students I taught were 9th through 12th graders who were exiting the bilingual program, and were being prepared to enter mainstream classrooms. Instead of looking at a junior who entered my class at a 6th grade reading level and exited at a 9th grade reading level a "failure" in NCLB terms, would it not make more sense to say "Wow!!! What terrific growth and improvement!!" to the student and celebrate his achievement, instead of telling him he is still behind?
Teachers and students have enough issues to address as it is without adding the ridiculous, unrealistic goals and demands of NCLB. It is no wonder that teachers, most especially those new to the profession, don't stick around long enough to become really proficient, further creating a "blind leading the blind" academic community! Add to that relatively low salaries (as compared to other professionals with similar education and experience), and the growing lack of respect given to public servents, and you're looking at a recipe for disaster.
Parents should be contacting their legislators and DEMAND that the flawed premise (I just can't use the word logic, because NCLB has none!) of NCLB be addressed, so that teachers and school districts can get back to the business of educating children, instead of trying to appease some bean counter in Washington!
11. Schools aren't about education anymore. Critical thinking has been replaced with tests (see also, 6 and 9) and DARE, sports trump all, and some religious group has more influence on your kids education than you think.
12. The real drug problem is all that dren they insist kids take for all of the ADHD and the other diseases and disorders that have been hyped by the pharmaceutical industry. Someday there will be a study that correlates things like no more recess and ritalin use and the public will stare in amazement at the newfound wisdom that if you let kids go play and run off steam then give them engaging content in class, they will sit and learn things. Give them ritalin and they will grow up to like meth...which is another correlation nobody wants to talk about...
I am one of those teachers who left the profession, Bill. I always wanted to be a teacher and I was a very good one for quite a few years. I cared deeply about my students as individuals, like they were my own kids. I demanded good behavior, but did it respectfully with consistency. Eventually, even the worst behavior problems came around and loved being in my classe. In my last school, one similar to Mary's, I was considered one of the top teachers.
But, the administration was corrupt and my incompetent principal for some reason did not like me - none of the teachers liked him, but I was one that he singled out for abuse. When I registered a complaint after years of this, the superintendent would not do anything about it and I had to leave. The following year, the entire school was ready to go through with a "no confidence" vote for the principal when the superintendent showed up and made a deal with them. He would remove the principal if they would cancel the vote. Guess what happened to the incompetent principal? He was given a teaching position in the HS of this same town - and he didn't even have a teaching certification! You see, the superintendent had hired this man - if he fired him, he would have to admit that he had made a bad hiring decision and his ego would not allow him to do that, no matter how many kids and teachers got hurt in the process.
From what I've seen, there are a lot of great teachers out there - some bad ones, but mostly good. But there are a lot of lazy, ego-inflated administrators who do not care about the kids in their schools. They are in it for the money - and in my area of the country, administrators make BIG bucks. I see this as a huge problem in the schools. Unfortunately, no one seems to talk about administrator accountability, just teacher accountability.
I was a high school teacher for six years but I had to leave because I couldn't afford to teach. I make twice as much now as a part-time technical writer than I did teaching full-time.
My children have gone to a Catholic school for the past five years and although many things are better there, I felt that there was still much that was lacking. I am looking forward next year to home-schooling them. I am excited about all of the things that we are planning to do--creative, project-type work. I am apalled at the amount of useless busywork that children are given. I don't blame the teachers; they are busy filling out forms and reports.
Thanks for the useful information and opportunity for discussion.
I wasn't blaming conservatives. I differentiate between conservatives and the type of fundamentalist who would like their own private madrasses...oops, I mean religious schools. I know lots of conservatives who agree with me.
As for DARE, the statistics say that kids who go through DARE are as likely, and in some cases MORE likely, to use illegal drugs than kids who don't. I'd like to see honest harm reduction education that acknowledges that humans like to get altered and there are sane ways to do so and not-so-sane ways. Marijuana is not as dangerous as meth or heroin, yet DARE lumps them together as if they were. Do they discuss addictive behavior and the enforced pharmaceutical use of speed on schoolchildren?
Dawn, although teachers are supposed to act as third parents, many parents deny them that (a legal right), thus teachers want to hide from parents. The more hiding that is done, the worse the school system treats kids in terms to meeting their growing needs.
Enoch, I believe the education system is not flawed so much as it is lacking in some areas of child development. It hasn't changed much in the past 200 years in terms of what services it provides.
Mary, as I am not a US citizen I am reluctant to voice an opinion about No Child Left Behind. (I am Canadian.)
I can tell you from experience that any child can progress quickly if his or her needs are met. That happens in some classes for immigrants, but not in regular classes. Somehow it is believed that special care is needed for immigrant children but not for those born in the country.
Kids have the same needs no matter where they are born or who their parents are. Unfortunately, the needs of many are met by sources other than teachers and parents, such as television commercials, billboards, video games, movies and the drug dealer on the street outside the school.
2. Sooooooooooo true! And totally unfair to both teachers and students.
3. Sooooooooo true again! I spent THOUSANDS (no exaggeration) on materials, furniture, computers, etc. What wasn't stolen was destoryed in the storm surge from Katrina. No insurance reimbursements for us.
4. I agree.
5. I've never needed to use force to manage my students, but I've always feared the students creating a story saying I did, which is why I would never shut the door to my classroom. (For the record, I've always taught at-risk children of poverty where discipline issues are vast, therefore I strongly believe phyiscal force is unneccessary for the majority of kids.)
6. True in most situaions, but I was lucky enough to teach in a district where the child was number one.
7. True. Mine lasted 6 years, but I am considering returning when I am finished having children and they are all in school. I don't miss that end of the burnt out feeling.
8. So far, I disagree, but will let you know once I have a second kid. LOL
9. I disagree. As a teacher I've always been encouraged and taught to teach to each child's individual learning styles. Doing this takes a lot of planning and organization, but it can be done and the results are nothing but positive.
10. True
11. I lenjoyed your article! :-)
TJ, in general, elected representatives lower down the totem pole have a better understanding of local issues, but less power to do anything about them.
Sheryl, I left teaching because I was afraid that I would end up in court because I wanted to meet the needs of my students more than I wanted to "enforce" the curriculum.
Tj (second entry), no child ever learned anything from a test. They are nothing more than accountability administrivia.
Elizabeth, I hope the article provided some insight to help you to understand.
Jeremy, thanks for your opinions. I respectfully stand by mine. I believe you missed the point on several of them. I don't care to elaborate.
Yes, people earn respect from me or they don't get it. Please distinguish between respect and common courtesy that I would give to anyone. Everyone receives a certain level of respect or courtesy from me, but only the few who earn more receive more.
Thanks, everyone.
My observation about teachers not working well together comes mainly from my experience as a teacher at the grade school level and university and as a sociologist who has studied education and child development for nearly four decades.
No teacher is comfortable with discipline, so I can't imagine why you ask. It's a grey area of the whole organization. Every teacher knows that litigation could result from a wrong move in any situation. Any teacher who is not leery about discipline doesn't know enough about the subject.
Over the years I have spoken with very many parents from all over North America, including the parents of my own students. What they all have is impressions of what happens in the classrooms of their children. Those impressions have filtered through the thoughts of their own children and rumours in the neighbourhood.
Please remember that all generalizations have exceptions and your experience may be exceptional. Your own experience alone is not enough on which to base opinions that are valid across the board. My own teaching experinece, for example, did not provide a broad enough base for what I have learned about the subject.
Thank you for the effort you have put into expressing your thoughts.
I enjoyed the read.
Excellent article.
Do you know the MBTI? Of course, you do. You probably also know that MOST teachers are ISTJ - keepers of the rules. However, the best teachers are usually ENFP or ENFJ, those who inspire.
We are very lucky in my town to have an excellent curriculum with excellent teachers. About 30 kids go to Harvard every year; others go to other Ivy league schools (a lot of parents in town ARE from Harvard or MIT);
that said, the school is difficult (courses are very demanding); the resources are in need of much, the teaching is uneven, with many new teachers erratic, and some of the kids really should not be there.
Enjoyed the article. I am a teacher, and if you want to have a real experience in teaching then you should try to write what you did while in a foreign country when the language is not the same, and the culture is quite different. I am an English Teacher in PR China, having come here directly after 911 hit my home-state New York.
There is only a handful of native teachers in PR China. People don't know the real meaning to being worn out, until you work in PR China. While Americans argue about petty things in their high schools, middle schools, and not so much the Primary schools, worse things are in front of us.
It is tough, but I have been at it now nearly 6 years. I can speak chinese, and my kids really have improved. My experience is that there are many things I really appreciate here in China, such as not worrying about students carrying guns to school, or drug problems. China is also not a place without its troubles, given the high population and the high unemployment rate for graduates..makes education seem like a worthless endeavor.
I do miss some things in the US, but when looking at the larger picture the US is really a reckless society that I frankly think needs serious adjustment, given a revolution, or a real switch licking in the woodshed to our so called government leaders. Right now I would not advocate anyone attend Universities who support this war.
The Fraud of American University Accreditation
By Dominic Jermano
There is a major problem in the United States with Accreditation. They claim they are legitimate but our current social condition and results have proven how really false that is. With the most recent University massacre at Virginia Tech killing 32 innocent Students and Teachers, not to mention the many other school shootings and killings across the United States; in which I personally witnessed a student gunned down at Weber State University in Ogden Utah, is proof in my mind that Accreditation in America's Higher Education Institutes, with just this one issue, the gun debate, has always lacked any creditability!
What is Accreditation and when did it begin? According to this site: http://www.acpe-accredit.org/edcenter/sitevisits/accreditation/overview.htm
{Definition and History: Accreditation is the public recognition awarded to universities and academic programs that meet established criteria and educational standards. Accreditation decisions are based on evaluations whose purpose is to provide a professional judgment about the quality of a university or academic program and to promote institutional improvement. In other words, accreditation's main goals are to assure and enhance quality.
Accreditation in the United States has a long history that has developed into a voluntary system which is unique in the world. The first regional accreditation agency started in New England in 1885; the first specialized accreditation agency was founded in 1907 by the American Medical Association; and the first accreditation standards were developed in 1910 by the North Central regional accreditation agency. Today, the Department of Education reviews all accreditation agencies every 5 years to make sure that they meet core requirements, but in all other respects, every U.S. accreditation agency is unique and free from government control in its day-to-day operations.}
Given that the Department of Education reviews Accreditation Agencies and is part of the Government goes to prove that Government does control Accreditation; despite their hypocritical claim that Agencies are free from Government control. And since the Government is employed by people who come from Accredited Universities, and those so called people are a product of Accreditation, why then all the scandals, the lies, the stealing, the murdering, and the idea that Democracy and freedom is a treasure, when in fact it has tarnished into a mass of National Trash.
The myth of Accreditation being able to give graduates its stamp of recognition is a fraud. In reality Universities merely sign a few papers, and make a payment or a bribe to an Accreditation Agency in order to give them the authority to be listed as an Accredited School. The prize is that they can get Federal money for students.
The University with its broad stroke authority is left with the responsibility in providing legitimate education that should include ethical conduct and correct principals toward education. In fact Universities don't care, because their boys are elected in Office and no one is going to challenge them if they don't follow Accreditation guidelines.
Accreditation has no authority to enforce its standards, has no authority to tell Universities what to do, and is basically nothing but a good ole boys network with no oversite organization requirements for Accreditation Agencies to adhere to. This is how the government and military establishment forces it will on the public.
One only needs to mention the numerous scandals: Enron, Arthur Anderson, Harken Energy, WorldCom, Halliburton, Fannie Mae, Exxon, Phar-Mor, Xerox, Epicurum fund/Parmalat, AIG, Royal Dutch Shell, Compass Group, Adelphi Communications, AOL Time Warner, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CMS Energy, Duke Energy, Dynegy, Global Crossing, Homestore.com, Kmart, Merck, Mirant, Nicor Energy, Peregrine, Qwest Communications, Reliant energy, Tyco, Credit Suisse First Boston, Martha Stewart, HealthSouth Corp. And this is the small list.
And so people who do these scams are not University graduates from the so called American Accreditation System?
What a sham it is when the US Government will use Accreditation to control the schools that represents their ideas. While there is no law that schools have to be accredited; non-accredited schools are not eligible for financial aid. Their non-accreditation comes because they do not want to be controlled by the Government, and they believe in teaching things that are really creditable, while Accredited Schools prohibit such teaching. The accusation that non-accredited schools are not real schools couldn't be more from the truth.
America's Constitutional idolization of the gun sure has not proven guns stop wars, stops massacres, stops drive by shootings, stops domestic violence, stops bank robberies, stops police from murdering blacks, stops assassinations, of our Presidents Abe Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, John F. Kennedy, and later his brother Bobby, stops the killing of our Civil Rights Leaders Malcolm Little, also known as Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King, or stops anything for that matter except the victims in their tracks.
What kind of an Education system do we have that honors the right to have guns, while claiming Accreditation authorizes them to do so while people pile up in the county morgues? Something is morally wrong with that! And let's not forget assassination attempts to kill Presidents, Andrew Jackson, Theodore, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan.
Should we be surprised, that Accreditation began with the early big time Universities such as Columbia, Princeton, Yale and Harvard, who really got their start from trafficking opium to China, with this really being the cause to the start of WWI which proceeded to WWII? Accreditation in America is to authorize the legal right to be crooks, drug dealers, and murders. It is far from being an Accreditation that is honorable and ethical.
Instead Accreditation means to educate from a hypocritical point of view, instead of recognizing that there is a right way and a wrong way. In America freedom is the elixir in which getting away with doing bad is OK, while doing good is boring and humdrum.
Our Government leaders are as incompetent, and they are suppose to hold the letter of the law and bar of that legitimacy, since they are products from those so called Accredited Institutions.
There is a huge list of so called graduates from Accredited Universities who have broken the law, broken their own rules to infringe upon the American people.
Donald Rumsfeld resigns for his bungling of the Iraq War and his torture authorizations at AbuGhrab Prison in Iraq , Paul Wolfowitz resigns as President of World Bank for giving his girl friend a raise from the World Bank after she was assigned to work at the State Department. He stole money claiming she still worked at the bank., Jack Abramoff - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to Minimum of 5 Years, 10 Months, Claude Allen- Arrested for Theft - Pled Guilt, Richard A. Berglund - Pled Guilty - Sentencing to One Year of Probation and Fined $2,500, Ed Buckham - Named by Prosecutors as Unindicted Coconspirator, Lester M. Crawford - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to Three Years Probation and Fined $90,000, Duke Cunningham - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to 8 years, 4 months incarceration, Tom DeLay - Indicted - Trial Pending Appeals Decision, Brian J. Doyle - Pled No Contest - Sentenced to Five Years in Jail, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo - Indicted - Trial Pending Appeals Decision, Robert Fromm - Named by Prosecutors as Unindicted Coconspirator, Shaun Hansen - Pled Guilty - Sentencing Scheduled for April, Vernon Jackson - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to Seven Years, Three Months in Prison, Representative William Jefferson (D-LA) is being investigated for bribery, wire fraud, bribery of a foreign official and conspiracy to bribe foreign officials, according to a May 21, 2006, Adam Kidan - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to 5 Years, 10 Months, Thomas Kontogiannis - Named by Prosecutors as Unindicted Coconspirator, Scooter Libby - Convicted- Sentencing Set For June 5, 2007, Chuck McGee - Pled Guilty - Time Served, John T. Michael - Named by Prosecutors as Unindicted Coconspirator, Bob Ney - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to 30 Months in Prison, Brent M. Pfeffer - Pled Guilty - Sentenced to 8 Years in Prison, Allen Raymond - Pled Guilty - Time Served, Tony Rudy - Pled Guilty - Status Conference Scheduled for August 3rd, David Safavian - Convicted - Sentenced to 18 Months, Michael Scanlon - Pled Guilty - Status Conference Scheduled for June 5th, Roger Stillwell – Pled Guilty – Sentenced to Two Years Probation and Fined $1,000, James Tobin - Found Guilty on Two Counts - Pending Appeals Decision, Neil Volz - Pled Guilty - Status Conference Scheduled for April 26th, Mitchell Wade - Pled Guilty - Status Conference Scheduled for September 10, 2007, Brent Wilkes - Indicted- Trials Pending Appeals Decision.
It is such a disgrace to think these government officials have committed these acts, while bigger fish are still being reeled in namely Dick Cheney, George Bush, Marvin Bush, Colin Powell, and Condoleezza Rice, Rudy Guiliani, Larry Silverstein, Andrew Card, Donald Rumsfeld, William Kristol, Douglas Feith, and others who are connected to this organized crime administration.
There is a huge divide in the American culture, in which many who authorize the Accreditation are supported by the Government Agencies in the US that represent the Republican Party, or Military Establishment.
And then there are the anti-war people, who normally are non-military supported by the Democratic Party. Many people disagree with the military establishment. And many Democrats also support the Military despite having a divided tent of votes in their party.
Many of the Universities support the military establishment because they promise them money. And how they get their money is by raising student tuition fees. Many very good students do not attend the Universities afraid their money is going for bombs to kill people. Tuition profits are used to support the military, along with appropriation bills from Congress for higher indebtedness.
Republicans will give you a tax cut in one hand and load up the debt in the other. In reality you don't get a tax cut, you get a long term financial burden. So much for their taxing lies! Am I Right? Of course!
In 2003 a sudden change in eligibility for Pell Grants was announced by the Department of Education. It would cut some 90,000 students from the rolls of recipients and affect more than 1 million others. The timing of the War was just underway, so it is obvious where the money went. And since the money was cut, how do students get to pay their tuitions?
They have to borrow the money. With the crunching for money for the War several Federal Government Officials are now under the scope in a developing investigation into the $85 billion-a-year college Student Loan Industry.
A handful of major Universities have suspended top Financial Aid Officials as the investigation continues by the Office of New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. The investigation now has linked a current Education Department Official with stock holdings in a leading student loan company.
Matteo Fontana, the General Manager of the National Student Loan Data System, a Central Database for Student Aid, including the Federal Direct Loan Program and Pell Grants has been linked to banks with ties to Corporate America that support the Military establishment. As these hotshot Financial Aid Officials trade loans for profits to support the War, students are caught holding the bag, because they were cut from the rolls in receiving Pell Grants, and they have to pay the higher interest on the loans because of the constant upward movement in University tuition fees.
How does Accreditation protect the rights of students to attend and pay for College, while they are being ripped off by the Government in schemes that hide their tracks in supporting the military? In fact it was a lie about going to War, exposing Valerie Plame when her husband proved Iraq's Saddam was not buying Yellow Cake Uranium from Niger.
You find a lot of propaganda that claim Big Universities turn down many applicants who wanted to attend their Institutes. In fact it is a lie. They create articles like this to build a false prestige in the world making people believe they are highly sought after when in fact they probably get less than average enrollment numbers. But they think their propaganda letters keep them in the game.
I really think those Accredited Schools are frauds and liars from the get go. I have more trust that so called Non-Recognized Universities have more legitimacy than the Accredited Universities in the States.
Consider the fact that I spend all that money in loans to get a degree to have to put up with drunken dorm parties that seem to go on endlessly, throughout the week, with drug users, and sex as the main course subject.
Then to simply go to class, is a form of entertainment for a few laughs. To my ignorant surprise I discover I have a rowdy roommate who will steal my personal things like soap, clothes, and money is not enough. But then to take my work, to steal from me so they get my credit!
What's the point? When exam proctors are paid cash to allow students to cheat on exams, so they get the higher grade; so they can claim the status of scholarly achievement upon the cheating tradition Accredited Schools wink and nod at!
Or to spend all that money at an Accredited University in which I did; so I can experience witnessing another student be shot down in cold blooded murder by someone in a well off Religious Community Campus!
Have you considered that Sororities and Frats are nothing but fancy names for the local high tech bullies with their gangs? And how about those Universities who claim Accreditation is necessary who run our government today? Wouldn't you agree that they are political liars, robbers, and murderers, especially the killing of little kids, mothers and grandparents in Iraq to protect my so called right to freedom in America? Then to have fathers who are trying to protect their families become instant terrorists and are gunned down and thrown in a sand ditch for burial.
Seems to me Non-Traditional Degree Holders have a different message and a different method of measuring and doing things that Accredited Junkies refuse to admit or acknowledge.
You know it is rather like comparing American Degrees to other Foreign Country Degrees. Would you call them fake? I dare say that those so called Non-Traditional Educators certainly have more knowledge and ability than a majority of Foreign Country Degree equivalents, and more upstairs when it comes to America's Accreditation System. I think people should consider these truths before they assume that Accreditation means the shoe fits! Or Fake means that's not a shoe it's a sandal. I know that's what Jesus would do.
The numerous examples of Accredited Schools which have proven to be bad or incompetent are not difficult to find. The same goes with Corporations, and Government Administrations whom have graduates from those so called Accredited Institutions whom have brought national disgrace and many other calamities to America's society' and in the world while getting away with it now and in the past.
We only have to remember history going back to Harry Truman who used the A-bomb by targeting innocent civilians in Japan instead of their military complex, thus wiping out hundreds of thousands of people, not once mind you but twice at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. One needs only remember the disgraceful bombing attack on Dresden Germany targeting innocent civilians instead of Hitler's military headquarters.
We have the Korean War which was Russia declaring War on Japan by supporting N. Korea to later invade S. Korea which was also controlled by Japan, making the US enter the War in Korea to stop Russia despite the US getting Japan to surrender earlier. This was a Truman blunder for not negotiating with Russia in the first place, while McArthur wanted to invade China.
Then we had the senseless war with Vietnam, the civil rights riots, Kent State, LBJ lies, Nixon Watergate, the Pentagon Papers revealed by Dr. Daniel Ellis, and Mike Gravel. Gerald Ford pardoning a crook, Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein, Jimmy Carter encouraging Iraq to war against Iran, Ronald Reagan's Iran Contra Trading Arms for hostages scandal, George Bush invading Iraq to kick Saddam out of Kuwait because the US was not paying him enough to fight America's war with Iran, to Bill Clinton and his sex affair impeachment, to George Bush Jr. with his bag of lies causing the killing of thousands of people over his false war on terror.
And this so called Accreditation continues on its free fall with 911 in which everyone knows it was an American inside job except the brokers in today's government who refuse to admit their involvement, while they continue the War in Iraq and Afghanistan to cover up their egregious crime on September 11th 2001.
Let's see any Ivy Leaguer go out and do things without the comforts of home most Accredited Universities provide. In fact the slumber of their high tuition prices prove how loathsome they really are. They do not do the real work, but are pampered from the beginning of their student experience to expect future rewards in life because they bought their degree at a high price. So money is supposed to prove their scholarly achievement? I really disagree.
How many times have I seen in my life numerous high credentials of so called scholars from these Accredited Institutions who become homeless bums on the street with a cup in one hand and a cardboard sign in the other? Many times, in fact; and Accreditation does what to solve that problem? Nothing!
Accreditation is supposed to be the stamp of approval for Universities who teach students legitimate and higher education. When gradates walk out the University doors and they commit crimes after their education, it sends a strong message that the University did not get through to that person, and questions the whole process and purpose of even attending in the first place.
What went wrong? Universities and Accreditation go hand in hand with the responsibility toward making sure students are labeled a bonafide product from their said approval. But in fact we see how really false that claim is. It's a reflection from our history as a nation and reflects the continued happenstance of today leading toward tomorrow.
The things Non-Traditional Degree Holders have contributed to society as a whole, in many instances, Accredited Universities are unable, or unknowingly able to provide or comprehend. Foremost having money does not and is not the stamp of Accreditation of Authorization to grant peoples their degrees. Take for instance graduates from Almeda University. People have to prove what they have done to earn their degree. It is not simply mailing in a payment. If that was the case I could easily go down to the print shop and make my own Diploma, with name plate, and honors for a mere $25 US bucks, and save the rest without paying more to Almeda University.
What really gets me, as we can all attest to, is the famous quote "Uncle Sam wants you." Mind you this is Accreditation talking while milking the public system with their fraud. They promise to give you a G.I. Bill so you can go to college after you finish joining the military.
You tell me how a student fresh out of High School has the ability to make such an important decision which will affect their lives for the rest of their lives, while dangling Education as a benefit and motive for joining the military?
How many mine fields and people do I have to kill to be able to go to the Accredited University? It should be "Uncle Sam Wants You For Higher Education" with no strings attached.
You know America holds this grand idea that the military is security. In fact it is quite the opposite. Education is the key. America moans and groans about not having enough education dollars domestically, while other people in the world outside the borders of America face the same problems yet worse.
Instead there is cross border arguments about why the have people do not do more to help the have-not people. That does not mean using the military to persuade ideology on another culture to take their resources and their belief systems.
Enlisted men are not given the chance for education before they go to war. Instead after the war they are so happy and proud they can go skiing on one leg instead of two?
Why do you think they use education as a ploy to enlist men with the GI Bill? So they will join the Army and the US government might not have to foot the bill for their education.
There is something morally wrong with that, and nobody seems to recognize it. If we had education systems that worked and provided funding properly not only in the USA but also in other countries; what need for a military? How much good could have been achieved with the trillions spent on killing in Iraq for the military, when it could have been used to educate and change the feelings and atmosphere of the situation? I think the answer is clear; much good.
The military is a business. They can not hold onto their business unless they have customers. Those customers are created enemies. They need to kill people in order to produce arms, and equipment which is economics, forced to be paid by the American people from their taxes. They sell arms to other countries causing terrorism, while promoting their own cause for needing a military. How, is that legitimate?
If I know the military is essentially the problem, why would I want to reinforce it? Why am I forced to pay a tax bill I did not create? Then to have them grandstand waving flags that they are patriotic in my great esteem is a fraud and crime to humanity.
Think about it. A lot of people are uneducated when they fall for the military doctrine of lies and go into battle. They have no concept to right and wrong about life, because they have not been given the opportunity for higher education. Subsequently they lose their lives.
It's like having a cold frost kill your crops before harvest time. Some of the crops may overcome the shock later, but indeed the outcome or harvest from that frost is not as optimal.
So to evade those bad feelings they proudly go along with the charade in their lives, as if that is/was the right thing to do. How can they assert that when they were not educated, and then come back to society to get an education? They really do not become educated because they were brainwashed in the service first.
President Bushes military experience is proof his education afterwards was a fruitless endeavor.
Yet the fake American System who claims their authority can't seem to stop lying, know when they have lied, or admit they can not determine the fate of other cultures in the world.
I would rather die for my country without a gun in my hand, and knowing it was done to promote education, values, and morality. That is the true fight. That is the Medal of Honor. That is the hero. That is legitimate.
I will never accept hitting my kids or doing violence to anybody is a justified act. Stopping someone from killing my wife does not mean killing them. Stopping perceived dictators from another country whom I do not know the culture or language is really obvious, especially when so called accreditation perceptions created them in the first place, to fight our wars with other nations.
Strange but true is the fact that people who go to Accredited Universities are the ones who set the tone and doctrine of who needs what in order to get an Accredited Degree.
I need to study 101 law, and 207 Ethics in order to be a Lawyer. The same goes with many Professions in society, be it a Physician, Pharmacist, CEO, Scientist, Engineer. But you do not need a Professional Degree to be President of the United States. A person can have a Business Degree, or any Non-Related Degree for that matter to be President.
You tell me how that is creditable? The man or woman who is in charge of world economic affairs and decisions of war which kill people has no Professional Presidential Credential? It's like saying I can sit out on the beach for 3 days all sunny and hot and not get sunburn. Not real! Fake! Phony! I don't believe!
There is no curriculum for Government. They have classes in it, but there is not a Professional Criteria or framework of accountability for government. It is a party system! Nothing but a bunch of Republican Elephant Democrat Donkey anarchy that thinks buying office or casting votes from an educationally deprived nation is their permission and authority to invade the supposedly sacred office of the Provider of the United States . Notice I did not say president.
The President does the dirty work by breaking the law, and then has an underling take the blame, and later the President pardons him! What kind of system is that? Or the President is caught red handed; his underlings fill in his shoes and pardon him! That my fellow Americans is Organized Crime.
In America it isn't about who scores the highest on the exam to reach the qualifications to be President or a Senator, or Congressman, it is about influence peddling, corruption, lies, and stealing elections that gain them power, and yet people in America are duped into believing their lies and forced to support that? I really disagree.
It is not the matter of being accredited that counts, it is a matter that accredited does not disclaim others as diploma mills, or claim their way isn't untainted, unspoiled, not rotten, or not infected by its disease, from its own doing, is the matter. Accreditation needs to change their ways so that it really reflects honesty, and transparency while bringing about the fact that education is the winner when it comes to domestic and foreign policy.
Accreditation in America is a scam and fraud; and until American's understand how they are being manipulated by this basket case education system, they will continue swimming in the dysfunctional American sewer hole that says getting a degree is worth it. In fact getting it with Accreditation is proving to be a major mistake.
If the purpose of Accreditation is to be a scam operation legally and make a good living from it; I only need remind you of the continued anarchy that repeats itself over and over again, because of the lack of truth and integrity. The military can really go take a hike!
The key thing, although it may seem Dominic took this conversation off course, is that his anger is exactly on point. While Bill and Jeremy and everyone else here are trying to fix schools (thank you), Dominic is pointing to the real education system - the business of marketing. I'm a proponent of holistic education but only recently came to realize that making schools more holistic is not, in fact, holistic. Holistic means everything is connected. You can't fix one thing without fixing everything else. For many if not all of the reasons and examples cited by Dominic, our system is much in need of a major overhaul. Our way of life needs, dare I say it, a revolution.
As it is, our official education reform movement, as epitomized by No Child Left Behind, is focused on mass producing child-widgets - weapons for future global competition. I don't think I'm a defeatist but, considering that China has more child prodigies than America has children, we might want to rethink our long-term strategy. Imagine producing people who know how to live happy, meaningful lives rather than lives of quiet, money-grubbing desperation. Obviously, I don't believe that money equals happiness but neither does that mean I believe in state socialism. Children, people can and will learn to support themselves as long as we don't teach them to hate learning, especially lifelong learning. Unfortunately, that is what far too many are learning in the current system .
The answers are to be found, I think, in community organization and activism - public education, boycotts, strikes, and most demanding of all, listening closely to the concerns and fears of our so-called opponents. By preaching to the choir, we will change nothing - we must reach out to the vast majority who know and care little about the promise of a more enlightened world of education. Our fuel is in the passion - the anger - expressed by Dominic. If a revolution is the only thing that will draw attention to the problems of education then we need to be sure of our enemy. Bush and his followers are not the real enemy - they thrive only because most of us are afraid to question the American dream or to make it our own. Pogo was right - "We have met the enemy and it is us."
Unfortunately today's teacher is expected to be an educator, guidance counselor, advisor, mentor, disciplinarian, etc, etc, etc; all for an increasing number of children. No wonder the NEA mantra is "lower class size"! Not to mention the parents' habit of second-guessing their every move. And the ever-decreasing funding of vital parts of curricula.
So if you can homeschool your kids and dont send them to school to get 'rid' of them for some peace and quiet. Believe me if something happens to them you will regret it for the rest of your life. Time with your family is so precious and hardly anyone has any of it anymore but we MUST focus on the future and thats what the younger generation is> The Future!
It's important for us to understand that a divergence of opinions is healthy, so we should not only expect to find differences of opinion here but want them. It's also important for us to understand that many potentially good teachers can't reach that potential because of the constraints that are put on them (not the least of which is no resources to work with--often none), including their inability to address the social and emotional needs of their children.
Good teachers are made, not born. But they must be allowed to develop in a healthy environment. The ones who "exist" in an unhealthy education environment maldevelop, just as any person might go off track if the influences on them are not in their best interests.
Good teachers can mentor their students, but it's very difficult for them to mentor other teachers because in many cases the system prevents this from happening.
Again I would like to direct anyone who reads this far to my web site to read more about how the education system can be changed for the better without tearing it apart from within or costing unimaginable fortunes. The TIA plan is cheap and it includes an implementation plan that will work. It's all about child development and the needs of children.
http://billallin.com
Thanks again for your valuable comments, insights and experiences.
Cheers
Bill
I was blessed with a slew of fabulous teachers in all elementary, high school and college of whom many radically challenged me and who I ultimately became. I live now in PR and realize even more how blessed I was. Our son had to attend a private school to get a good education as the public system is not working. If a teacher does not show up for school, the students are sent home....walking and without notification of the parents. Very dangerous. Also, there is little to no effort to assure kids stay on the school property during the school hours as was maintained during my schooling. You see kids walking the streets and in malls during all hours of the day and I have heard parents discuss finding out their child had skipped a class for more than two weeks and found out at a parent teacher meeting or when grades came in. While a not perfect system in any location, the dedication of all teachers is amazing and should be honored.
I haven't seen your stuff in a while. I think you are getting buried beneath other things. You made a lot of really good points. Now that I have my masters in education and have some classroom experience, I can pretty much agree with this. We are encouraged in school to work as a team but most of us like working alone. We are taught that we should make children engage in group work - which we ourselves dislike. Then we have to answer to parents who disagree with putting their kids in groups.
Most exams, in essence, ask the student to pretend to teach someone about the subject matter. Actually, trying to teach someone else well enough to have an understanding and comprehention of the material and an ability to use it will immediately indicate to the student, as acting instructor, where a good understanding is lacking and needs further reconnoitering, thought and practice.
Recognizing this, were I a teacher, my primary homework assignment to my students would be to teach the material to the parents. A requirement for passing on to the next grade would be the parents' passing a final exam.
Expounding upon the many good ramifications of this procedure would take many more words and much time, but some thought on it will undoubtedly bring them to mind, such as increased rapport between child and parents, esteem of, and confidence building in, the child by being able to enhance the parents education and awareness and appreciation, the efficacy of the team of parents and child in the exploration and research, together, to find the information and facts lacking but necessary to all to acquire the required proficiency, the fun of shared appreciation of the world through the realization of increased knowledge and abilities on the parts of both parents and child, etc.
Cheers.