[AXOmom]

I don't comment on the "political" threads often, but since I do have about 25 years of teaching experience, I put in m two cents on this one.

1) I do think education should be as locally based as possible meaning I think the more the local community controls where education money goes, the better, and I don't see that the DOE has done much good for education as a whole. The one exception I see to this is that I do think there should be national standards in terms of what children need to know or learn at what age. This is all over the board from district to district, so if a kid moves around at all (and most will at some point) they lose a ton of time trying to play catch up because there is a likelihood that what the 4th graders in Columbus, Ohio are learning at what the 4th graders in Bozeman, Montana are learning aren't remotely connected. It also means that a college instructor will face a class of 200 kids with radically different background information.

2. Other than agreement on what information a child should be exposed to or learn from grade to grade, I tend to be wary of any absolute statements in terms of what works for kids. Nothing works for all of them and most things will work for at least a few. This is the reason that while I taught in public schools and I believe in them as the best option for most kids, I don't think it is the right option for all of them and I do believe parents need those options.

3) I agree that standardized tests should not be a sole determining factor for anything, but they should be considered as one of many factors. The problem isn't the tests but how they are used. I will say that most of the tests currently used aren't like the CAT or Iowa achievement tests most of us took. They aren't strictly fill in the bubble. For instance, on the WASL (the test Washington state uses) students work out math problems. They don't pick from a list of possible answers, and they are given points (1-4). They write an essay. Very little of the test is filling in a bubble (I have other issues with the test, but it does give a pretty good indicator of what a student knows). On most of the current tests used - teachers can get a wealth of data back that helps us know what concepts they understand and what they don't understand. Ours are also pretty lenient with students who have test anxieties. It doesn't solve every problem, but they aren't out to scare the kids to death.

4) My current school uses uniforms. Do I think they make a huge difference? Probably not. I don't think they prevent kids from picking on each other. I do think they prevent some distractions. I do think teachers spend less time dealing with dress code violations and discussions over what is or isn't appropriate in a school setting. It standardizes those issues so that no one feels singled out. Beyond that, I'm not sure how much they matter.

5) While I agree that it isn't financially feasible, and I don't think it should be mandatory, having taught once in a single sex setting, I do think it generally works better. It isn't an issue of it being better for girls or better for boys - it works better for both of them. Usually (not always) they spend too much time when they are together trying to impress each other and their methods for doing that often revolve around things that disrupt classroom learning. I've just found that if you remove the distraction they are to each other, they focus better on the task at hand. I should say that I am referring to middle school and high school here. Don't think it makes a difference in elementary schools as much.

6) Totally agree that children and their parents need to be directed in paths that are best for them. I am a little nervous about the European system. I know at one point in Germany they used tests to decide which direction to track students (technical, vocational, college) in the 4th grade. I personally think that's much too young, and I think what a child and their parent wants should be taken into account. I would be uncomfortable leaving that decision to a school. We are wrong about kids all the time. They surprise us all the time. On the other hand, I do think Americans are too sold on the "college is the only way to have a future and any kid who doesn't go will be stuck in a dead end job for life" mentality and its two steps down from the stressed out parents on college confidential who think their child is ruined if they don't end up at an Ivy League school. Not everyone wants to go to college and not everyone should go to college.

Most of the guidance counselors I knew were caring people who loved the kids they worked with and put a lot of time into them. I'm sure there are some who might direct a kid based on their economic background, but I never met one. If anything, they were guilty of the same thinking we just mentioned - they wanted every kid to go to college - even if it wasn't always a good option for them based on interest and ability. Again, I would put the blame for that on our culture as a whole. We believe strongly that education is the key to a successful life. I believe in it or I wouldn't be a teacher, but education can mean a lot of things, and it doesn't always mean a classroom. Unfortunately, with budget cuts, those other types of learning are usually the first things to go.