If schools do not go back

Based upon what I saw post shutdown, there was zero accountability on the part of the students/parents to get any school work done. I had kids playing outside in the neighborhood from 8a.m.-8p.m every day, and that's only ended recently due to heat. There's no way these kids got any education "learning" from home, except in social promotion. There was zero accountability, and zero consequences.
Due to that I think the appropriate thing to do is send the kids back to the classrooms. I've heard the 3 on 2 off rotation, but due to the busing/transportation obstacle I don't think that rotation will work. MY proposal would be break the kids up alphabetically. 20% of the kids attend their classes one day a week M-F. That day is the day you turn in hard copy homework, take tests and quizzes, and hash out concepts the kids can't figure out from home, and receive the next weeks syllabus and hard copy homework.
Doing it the 20% daily way would keep everyone employed by the school system working, allow sufficient space for distancing in classrooms and on buses, and afford some measure of accountability for progress on both the teachers and the students.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMP
Teaching is an extremely difficult job. Until you have been there (teacher or parent) I don’t really think it is wise to comment about what should or shouldn’t be done. I am a high school CTE teacher and routinely work 70-80 weeks. I’m not complaining because I love what I do and I knew what I was getting into. But when folks make erroneous claims it’s time to speak up.

Schools will be going back in August. We just do not know on what capacity. At home learning is extremely difficult and I would much rather do teaching in the classroom.

Many districts are providing families with options regarding student learning. Many school systems are starting virtual academies where students can attend online if they do not want to participate in the physical classroom due to Covid.

Also, for years many school systems have allowed students to transfer to out of district to attend schools that have programs not offered at their assigned school.

The state really screwed things up last semester when they told students their grading policies. Students had no reason to be held accountable.
 
Last edited:
If kids don't go back to school Teachers should not be paid. If they teach online or go part time they should be prorated for their services. If nothing else parents should be given school choice to look at private options with their allotted monies.
I’m a little conflicted here but have to disagree with you. I understand your premise but I think some of your assumptions are flawed.

My wife teaches and when she came back from maternity leave for 3wk before her district’s summer officially started, she had no less work to do despite working from home. She is no longer in the classroom full time, rather works with behavior challenged kids and helps teachers handle them. Her work never stops, she still has to evaluate their behavior, identify the issues, create a plan for the teacher and sometimes parent. Now it’s primarily the parent. We both wish she was getting an extra 2 days off but that isn’t the case. Why should she take a pay cut?

Same goes for the dedicated classroom teachers in her district (in your town). They still have to make lesson plans, are still teaching just remotely now. Doing so remotely is no easier. They don’t have a ton of down time, they’re having to do multiple small groups throughout the day. Why should they take a pay cut?

Public school teachers are at the mercy of King Cooper. It sounds like your daughters school is doing things a little differently and that’s great that they’re able to do so.
 
I have a lot of thoughts on COVID-19 and the effect on Education. I am just not ready nor have time to post them in a way that condenses my thoughts....

One thing I do know, is that right now our kids are being failed by the Educational System and the Governor's.... the parents share culpability... the Unions and the Autocrats definitely share culpability... and there are Great Teachers, Good Teachers, Teachers and Terrible Teachers...

It's complex... but our kids and our country is being done a disservice.
Maybe I will post more when I have time..
 
Based upon what I saw post shutdown, there was zero accountability on the part of the students/parents to get any school work done.
You’re correct. I know in CMS and my wife’s district, everyone was scrambling at a district level to figure out what to do, how to even handle “remote learning”. There was zero accountability. My wife’s district essentially “accepted” that progress was going to be minimal for the remainder of the current school year so that they needed to focus on building a solid plan for next year. This coming school year will look very different from the first 2-3mo.
 
@VA_GENTLEMAN There are no teacher unions in NC FYI. They have NCAE but it’s nothing like unions in Northern states.
QFT. Unless you've paid taxes to the schools in Illinois, one doesn't know the pain of northern unions or associated school taxes.20200709_104213.jpg
 
Last edited:
Decided she wanted to double her salary. It was a midlife crisis of sorts. It was a private Christian school and they had told her she would be headmaster if she made it a career.

Ahhh…..ok. Yeah, my wife wanted to double her salary as well. She went back and got her 2nd Masters and a Bachelors degree as well, all for early childhood education. Hopefully, she'll be the "Headmaster" one day.
 
Ahhh…..ok. Yeah, my wife wanted to double her salary as well. She went back and got her 2nd Masters and a Bachelors degree as well, all for early childhood education. Hopefully, she'll be the "Headmaster" one day.

My wife is an attorney.
 
I think my kids teachers did an outstanding job during the Covid shutdown. They were thrown into a situation that they were not prepared for and hamstrung by the uncertainty of the leadership they have. They did an amazing job of of developing an alternative remote learning curriculum in a very short span of time.

While we non teachers were adapting to working from home and remote working, the teachers had to bring the classroom to each individuals home.

The content of the remote learning wasn't as effective as in classroom learning. Remote learning curriculums take years to develop, these teachers adapted what they could, the best they could in the short time that they had. I think they did a great job.

It could have been a better job, if they had time and knew the shutdown was coming months in advance
 
My wife is an attorney.

And I'm in sales with only a high school diploma, probably earning double what your wife does, what's your point?

My point is that my wife has a huge heart and is personally invested to her job, and again, it's not as easy as most think, they earn their paychecks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HMP
I don’t know the exact year but it was during the timeframe when Perot was running for POTUS a public tv program was run displaying how a school district in a sparely populated county in North Dakota educated their children with a computer program written by a firm in Texas. The curriculum, grades 1-12, was entirely a computer application that allowed the students to go at their own pace assisted by three teachers. There were only 60 student in the whole district thus the low number of teachers. Usually the students studied their courses half the day and then were allowed to study courses of their interest. One student was a below average achiever that was expelled from school as much as in but in a short time grasp the new system ending up as a Rhodes scholar. Now I’m not saying all the students did as well but the twenty plus years since the computer courses were first introduced compared to today’s needs something tells me the education system needs a overhaul and now is a good a time as we will get.
 
Based upon what I saw post shutdown, there was zero accountability on the part of the students/parents to get any school work done. I had kids playing outside in the neighborhood from 8a.m.-8p.m every day, and that's only ended recently due to heat. There's no way these kids got any education "learning" from home, except in social promotion. There was zero accountability, and zero consequences.
Due to that I think the appropriate thing to do is send the kids back to the classrooms. I've heard the 3 on 2 off rotation, but due to the busing/transportation obstacle I don't think that rotation will work. MY proposal would be break the kids up alphabetically. 20% of the kids attend their classes one day a week M-F. That day is the day you turn in hard copy homework, take tests and quizzes, and hash out concepts the kids can't figure out from home, and receive the next weeks syllabus and hard copy homework.
Doing it the 20% daily way would keep everyone employed by the school system working, allow sufficient space for distancing in classrooms and on buses, and afford some measure of accountability for progress on both the teachers and the students.

I don't know that seeing what kids were/weren't doing is a good metric by which to judge if a child is learning. Most of my kids get their schoolwork done in 3-5 hours; generally, the rest of the days is 'theirs.' One of my sons is a night owl, he did most of his school in the evening.

I do agree though that with such enormous changes in such a short period of time there could have been issues with accountability.
 
I don’t know the exact year but it was during the timeframe when Perot was running for POTUS a public tv program was run displaying how a school district in a sparely populated county in North Dakota educated their children with a computer program written by a firm in Texas. The curriculum, grades 1-12, was entirely a computer application that allowed the students to go at their own pace assisted by three teachers. There were only 60 student in the whole district thus the low number of teachers. Usually the students studied their courses half the day and then were allowed to study courses of their interest. One student was a below average achiever that was expelled from school as much as in but in a short time grasp the new system ending up as a Rhodes scholar. Now I’m not saying all the students did as well but the twenty plus years since the computer courses were first introduced compared to today’s needs something tells me the education system needs a overhaul and now is a good a time as we will get.

Ross Perot was ahead of his time with regard to education policy.
 
I liked the distance learning only in that my wife worked 8 hour days instead of 12-13 hour days and didn't go in "for a few hours" on Saturday or Sunday.

I'm 100% for home schooling, but realistically it is not for every family. The same people that shouldn't have had any kids in the first place sure as shit will not lift a finger to ensure their spawn are on task.
 
And I'm in sales with only a high school diploma, probably earning double what your wife does, what's your point?

My point is that my wife has a huge heart and is personally invested to her job, and again, it's not as easy as most think, they earn their paychecks.
Lol it's like your offended. I was just telling you why she went back to her other job like you told me your wife did school. upload_2020-7-9_11-39-46.gif

That said a toilet paper salesman would make more than most attorneys and I said earlier my wife took a huge pay cut to stay at home with our daughter. Still doubled her salary as a teacher.
 
Last edited:
I don't know that seeing what kids were/weren't doing is a good metric by which to judge if a child is learning. Most of my kids get their schoolwork done in 3-5 hours; generally, the rest of the days is 'theirs.' One of my sons is a night owl, he did most of his school in the evening.

I do agree though that with such enormous changes in such a short period of time there could have been issues with accountability.

If they kids were supposed to be online listening to a live lecture via webcam, how exactly were they doing that while simultaneously terrorizing the neighborhood on skateboards and bikes? If the actual work was more like read three chapters and write a 3 page summary of your experience, then sure doing it at night is a plausible possibility. I was under the impression that they had web cam classes. My neighbor told me that what his kid was supposed to be doing, but there was an ongoing problem in his house where they needed more computers and his wife's work took precedence over the kids school. :rolleyes:
 
I don't care if kids go back or not. What I do care about is taxes. If you want your kid educated- Then YOU pay for that kids education. Everyone here should be on board with eliminating ALL public schools.
I'm going to disagree with you. Everybody benefits from having the children educated. Someday you'll be old and infirm, and you'll be dependent on people younger than you to keep the lights on, the meds flowing, and the toilets flushing. Educating our kids as a society is a good idea.
 
I'm 100% for home schooling, but realistically it is not for every family. The same people that shouldn't have had any kids in the first place sure as shit will not lift a finger to ensure their spawn are on task.
I would like to know how we got to the current paradigm? How did something that should have been parental responsibility become off loaded on government and obligatory for property owners to pay for? Lets also ask if we are getting our monies worth? How much waste is going into administrative overhead, real estate, transportation, utilities, and all sort of other expenses. For that matter, why should I care if YOUR kids actually learn anything or even attend? If you don't care enough that they only thing they'll be qualified to do once they reach the age of maturity is dig ditches or be a deputy dog catcher, that's your problem not mine.

Consider also what has happened with the creation of generations of indoctrinated socialists, and other booger eaters that are now out "protesting" because they want socialism. That is your tax dollars at work. Time to shut it down.
 
If they kids were supposed to be online listening to a live lecture via webcam, how exactly were they doing that while simultaneously terrorizing the neighborhood on skateboards and bikes? If the actual work was more like read three chapters and write a 3 page summary of your experience, then sure doing it at night is a plausible possibility. I was under the impression that they had web cam classes. My neighbor told me that what his kid was supposed to be doing, but there was an ongoing problem in his house where they needed more computers and his wife's work took precedence over the kids school. :rolleyes:

I know some places did asynchronous education; they put it all online, and gave the kids deadlines. Yeah, i don't know how your place did it differently, and why school X did it differently than school Y.
 
I'm going to disagree with you. Everybody benefits from having the children educated. Someday you'll be old and infirm, and you'll be dependent on people younger than you to keep the lights on, the meds flowing, and the toilets flushing. Educating our kids as a society is a good idea.

No one disagrees that children should be educated. The argument is, who should deliver it? Who should fund it? Why is it OK to say that it should be a public burden with education, but not with healthcare? I know the argument is a slippery slope, the end point being "all taxation is theft" and constitutional responsibility.
 
I would like to know how we got to the current paradigm? .

I don't know the answer specifically, but I'd bet that some parents are better at building things, growing things, or serving things than they are at teaching things. Division of labor is a concept as old as hunter-gatherer. Those who could hunt did. Those who couldn't were gatherers. As things progress I'd imagine folks figured out that some people have a better grasp on teaching and wanted them helping their kids as well.
 
I would like to know how we got to the current paradigm? How did something that should have been parental responsibility become off loaded on government and obligatory for property owners to pay for? Lets also ask if we are getting our monies worth? How much waste is going into administrative overhead, real estate, transportation, utilities, and all sort of other expenses. For that matter, why should I care if YOUR kids actually learn anything or even attend? If you don't care enough that they only thing they'll be qualified to do once they reach the age of maturity is dig ditches or be a deputy dog catcher, that's your problem not mine.

Consider also what has happened with the creation of generations of indoctrinated socialists, and other booger eaters that are now out "protesting" because they want socialism. That is your tax dollars at work. Time to shut it down.

I'm with ya, man, I'm with ya.
 
I would like to know how we got to the current paradigm? How did something that should have been parental responsibility become off loaded on government and obligatory for property owners to pay for? Lets also ask if we are getting our monies worth? How much waste is going into administrative overhead, real estate, transportation, utilities, and all sort of other expenses. For that matter, why should I care if YOUR kids actually learn anything or even attend? If you don't care enough that they only thing they'll be qualified to do once they reach the age of maturity is dig ditches or be a deputy dog catcher, that's your problem not mine.

Consider also what has happened with the creation of generations of indoctrinated socialists, and other booger eaters that are now out "protesting" because they want socialism. That is your tax dollars at work. Time to shut it down.

And here is when I put on my own conspiratorial tinfoil hat: I think the reason that so many schools and officials want to get schools back to work as soon as possible is because the more they are closed or delayed, the more people see there are better alternatives and take the kids out of public schools.
 
No one disagrees that children should be educated. The argument is, who should deliver it? Who should fund it? Why is it OK to say that it should be a public burden with education, but not with healthcare? I know the argument is a slippery slope, the end point being "all taxation is theft" and constitutional responsibility.
I don't have kids. Taxes for education irritate me. I accept them though because I recognize that we'd go all Lord of the Flies if we didn't make it society's burden to educate the kids. If the public funded education is lacking then private education is an option, but public education needs to exist or we'd have the poor families unable to educate their kids and they'd never break free of poverty.
My real beef with the public school system is the publicly funded indoctrination of the kids. There's far too little oversight into what is allowed into the books/curriculum and there's far too much difficulty involved to fire teachers who actively indoctrinate children.

I don't work health care like you do so I have cursory knowledge here, but it's my understanding that everybody got healthcare already prior to Zerocare. Prices are so high for emergency room visits because people with insurance were covering the costs of people without. The Zerocare just made it easier on the insurance companies to make more money and the government just went along with it for the additional control they could leverage over the little people.
 
I don't have kids. Taxes for education irritate me. I accept them though because I recognize that we'd go all Lord of the Flies if we didn't make it society's burden to educate the kids. If the public funded education is lacking then private education is an option, but public education needs to exist or we'd have the poor families unable to educate their kids and they'd never break free of poverty.
My real beef with the public school system is the publicly funded indoctrination of the kids. There's far too little oversight into what is allowed into the books/curriculum and there's far too much difficulty involved to fire teachers who actively indoctrinate children.

I don't work health care like you do so I have cursory knowledge here, but it's my understanding that everybody got healthcare already prior to Zerocare. Prices are so high for emergency room visits because people with insurance were covering the costs of people without. The Zerocare just made it easier on the insurance companies to make more money and the government just went along with it for the additional control they could leverage over the little people.

You bring up good points, and I enjoy the discussion. I often wrestle with education and how it should be delivered. I know, because I see, the parents who themselves have a 10th-grade education, pushing out babies at 15 or 16. They are not going to give their kids an education. Many of them are functionally illiterate. Which circles back to public education, and how they fell through the cracks. I know what "perfect" looks like, and we will never, ever see "perfect."
 
Public education , in part, rose from the belief that an educated population is a more productive and innovative population, therefore produces more in terms of taxes, GDP, and other intrinsic benefits to the society as a whole. Three general rules in society to avoid poverty in the US is to graduate high school, wait to get married until after 21, and do not have children until after marriage. While people who don't follow those three rules >can< be successful, no doubt, the path there is much more difficult. One focuses on basic literacy, one on maturity, and one on financial stability.

According to the census bureau 24.5% of of all adults over the age of 25 with no high school diploma live below the poverty line, compared to 12.9% for those who have a high school diploma. The trend continues with 9% of those with some college, and only 4.3% with a college degree.

And while we can start a whole other thread on the efficacy of social welfare, we can all at least see that paying to get kids educated has a drastic impact on keeping them out of poverty and off the dole in the long run.
 
Public education , in part, rose from the belief that an educated population is a more productive and innovative population, therefore produces more in terms of taxes, GDP, and other intrinsic benefits to the society as a whole. Three general rules in society to avoid poverty in the US is to graduate high school, wait to get married until after 21, and do not have children until after marriage. While people who don't follow those three rules >can< be successful, no doubt, the path there is much more difficult. One focuses on basic literacy, one on maturity, and one on financial stability.

According to the census bureau 24.5% of of all adults over the age of 25 with no high school diploma live below the poverty line, compared to 12.9% for those who have a high school diploma. The trend continues with 9% of those with some college, and only 4.3% with a college degree.

And while we can start a whole other thread on the efficacy of social welfare, we can all at least see that paying to get kids educated has a drastic impact on keeping them out of poverty and off the dole in the long run.

I think, like many government interventions, public schools suffer from the consequences of good intentions. There is a metric crap-ton of data that show the benefits of education and relationship between education and GDP/economy. I am also sensitive to the fact that historically colleges were meant for the upper class, the rich, with connections, and that public education became a way to level that field. What we've ended up with was nothing that was originally envisioned.

So we have two end points, on the left end "need for education," and the right defining character being "educated child." The issues, the questions, are all on that line in the middle. Same for healthcare: everyone agrees we need affordable healthcare accessible to everyone, but the devil is in the details.
 
Maybe its time to reevaluate things. Maybe instead of both parents working, one could stay home with the kids and actually raise them.

Just a thought.
Given the trajectory we're on, a "universal basic income" might be sold to the public based upon your premise. One parent can stay home to raise the kids and Uncle Sugar will print more money to give it away to make up for the lost income. This isn't economically sustainable. I think the market will need to completely and irrevocably collapse with our money going with it. A reset isn't a reset unless we all start out from zero and build from there.
 
Given the trajectory we're on, a "universal basic income" might be sold to the public based upon your premise. One parent can stay home to raise the kids and Uncle Sugar will print more money to give it away to make up for the lost income. This isn't economically sustainable. I think the market will need to completely and irrevocably collapse with our money going with it. A reset isn't a reset unless we all start out from zero and build from there.
I'm not bringing the government into this, not sure why you are.
It's called sacrifice for the important things in life.
 
I'm not bringing the government into this, not sure why you are.
It's called sacrifice for the important things in life.
I suppose it depends on how a person defines "the important things in life". Some people might say having two incomes to buy a better house, better food and better education for their kids is more important than scraping by and ending up with a house in a worse neighborhood, with malnourished kids who ends up not doing well in life because their school was underfunded and on the wrong side of the tracks. Not having the income it takes to make a better life for your kids puts them at a disadvantage.

I think you are quite a bit older than I. Possibly old enough to be in my father's generation. Back when he was young a single income family could make it work. These days that's very, very difficult. Incomes haven't kept pace. Immigration has turned good paying blue collar jobs into poor to mediocre paying jobs. Outsourcing has dried up tech jobs and factory work. These days $21k annual is poverty level for a family of three. $21k is also the same as $10/hr full time. So if some guy with just a high school education decided to get an entry level job and have his wife stay home to raise their kid they'd have a tough time of it. On a national basis rent (not buying a house even) is $1100/month or $13200 a year. What do they eat? What do they wear? How do they pay for heat, gas, water? Sure would be nice if that wife of his got herself a job. Assuming she could also pull $10/hr the extra $21k she makes would be a huge upgrade in living comfort. As time passes they get better jobs and make more, but even with both people working if they're making less than $100k annual all they know is sacrifice.

That being the case, I bring government into the discussion because it's relevant here. There's communists infiltrating the government and pushing the universal basic income. The benefit for some families will be the ability to let one of the spouses stay home to raise the kids, as you suggested. That's how this all ties together.
 
More stuff was not what I meant by the important things in life.
The kids don’t care if you live in a mansion or a double wide. And kids that eat home cooked meals rarely suffer from malnutrition.
It all depends on your definitions of things.

Times sure have changed. Some for the better and some for the worse.

ps ... I ain’t that old.
 
More stuff was not what I meant by the important things in life.
The kids don’t care if you live in a mansion or a double wide. And kids that eat home cooked meals rarely suffer from malnutrition.
It all depends on your definitions of things.

Times sure have changed. Some for the better and some for the worse.

ps ... I ain’t that old.

I agree. I think the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" is a marker of the down fall of society. Because it took the mother out of the home destabilizing the family nucleus. Maybe that's sexist.
 
I agree. I think the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" is a marker of the down fall of society. Because it took the mother out of the home destabilizing the family nucleus. Maybe that's sexist.
It was certainly the end of an era. Keeping up with the Joneses fell to keeping up with inflation when wages stagnated. There's a lot that went wrong relative to how things used to be that's for sure.
 
I agree. I think the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" is a marker of the down fall of society. Because it took the mother out of the home destabilizing the family nucleus. Maybe that's sexist.
Don’t think so. Paying women to have babies and the subsequent abuse of welfare laws is more like it.
 
Back
Top Bottom