English-only, please.

[Vince524]

Originally Posted by benbradley

So does this mean EVERY TEACHER will have to be bilingual?

Originally Posted by rwam

Oh my gosh....that would be SO hot!

I do not think this means what you think it means.

[rwam]

Originally Posted by Vince524

I do not think this means what you think it means.

Well, that kinda sucks donkey nuts then.

[Vince524]

Originally Posted by rwam

Well, that kinda sucks donkey nuts then.

In more than one language, yes.

[benbradley]

That was an interesting distraction, er, derail, but I was just thinking - teachers being fluent in multiple langages would be a Good Thing. It could cause the hiring of more foreign-born polyglots, and having teachers from around the world can expose students to different cultures in ways that couldn't be done otherwise. I spent a year and two summers at a private high school. One of the teachers was from I-forget-where, somewhere in Europe. I had his Latin class (in which when someone said how hard Latin was, he went into how it was to learn English as a second or Nth language: "horse, horses, house, houses, mouse, mice"), I forget what other languages he taught, probably all of them, but he was also a Holocaust survivor, and one day he gave a lecture on it.

[Vince524]

Originally Posted by benbradley

That was an interesting distraction, er, derail, but I was just thinking - teachers being fluent in multiple langages would be a Good Thing.

And then what happens to the wonderful teacher who is great at teaching Math or Science, but can't speak another language?

[benbradley]

They get a promotion into private school.

[Gretad08]

Originally Posted by benbradley

They get a promotion into private school.

Private schools in my area pay SUBSTANTIALLY less, and you don't get Missouri public school retirement either. Wouldn't be a good thing here.

[Shadow_Ferret]

So does this mean Spanish is the official un-official second language of the United States?

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by Vince524

And then what happens to the wonderful teacher who is great at teaching Math or Science, but can't speak another language?

This got me thinking that if the teaching profession were elevated to the level it should be, then a requirement to be biligual wouldn't even be an issue. They'd all have master's and doctorate degrees to boot.

And yes, rwam, they'd be hot, in more ways than one.

[Yorkist]

OMG Chrissy, we agree on something.

Ever heard that phrase, "A students teach B students to work for C students?" Yeah, teaching should be the ideal profession for our society's nerdiest and most bookish people. But because the prestige and pay of teaching are so relatively low, those people become attorneys and engineers and stuff instead. If I were born 30 years ago, I'd have been an English teacher, no question. I really wish I was one now, but not so much I want to halve my pay and have parents act like I'm a monster for not praising their special snowflake for being a lazy entitled little shit.

[Vince524]

Originally Posted by Chrissy

This got me thinking that if the teaching profession were elevated to the level it should be, then a requirement to be biligual wouldn't even be an issue. They'd all have master's and doctorate degrees to boot.

And yes, rwam, they'd be hot, in more ways than one.

Yeah, but you couldn't just do that. I mean, many teachers don't speak 2 languages. You can't just toss them out.

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by Yorkist

OMG Chrissy, we agree on something.

Ever heard that phrase, "A students teach B students to work for C students?" Yeah, teaching should be the ideal profession for our society's nerdiest and most bookish people. But because the prestige and pay of teaching are so relatively low, those people become attorneys and engineers and stuff instead.

lol We agree! *cheers*

You know, I've been thinking about health care too, and how it's such a vital, necessary service, and since education, IMO, is right beneath that in terms of necessity (right beneath it.... soooo close) I am flabbergasted by the disparity. How does the dissemination of education fall so drastically below medical care?

But... people go to school to be doctors and make bukoo bucks, and going to school to be a teacher ranks so much lower, financially speaking.

It's messed up. My thinking is that it's because education, grades K-12, is free. Whereas, right now, medical care is dependent on your ability to pay. I'm not happy with that, but I'm struggling here. Are doctors destined to be relegated to the level of teachers, if free medical care is enacted? Not good either. I'd much rather raise the level of teachers to that of doctors, than to lower the level of doctors to teachers.

This could be (even more of) a derail from the OP, and I apologize. It's just a connundrum for me, and I'm trying to figure it out.

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by Vince524

Yeah, but you couldn't just do that. I mean, many teachers don't speak 2 languages. You can't just toss them out.

True, true. But it would be a gradual process.

[Alessandra Kelley]

Originally Posted by Chrissy

lol We agree! *cheers*

You know, I've been thinking about health care too, and how it's such a vital, necessary service, and since education, IMO, is right beneath that in terms of necessity (right beneath it.... soooo close) I am flabbergasted by the disparity. How does the dissemination of education fall so drastically below medical care?

But... people go to school to be doctors and make bukoo bucks, and going to school to be a teacher ranks so much lower, financially speaking.

It's messed up. My thinking is that it's because education, grades K-12, is free. Whereas, right now, medical care is dependent on your ability to pay. I'm not happy with that, but I'm struggling here. Are doctors destined to be relegated to the level of teachers, if free medical care is enacted? Not good either. I'd much rather raise the level of teachers to that of doctors, than to lower the level of doctors to teachers.

This could be (even more of) a derail from the OP, and I apologize. It's just a connundrum for me, and I'm trying to figure it out.

Teaching was a high prestige, high pay profession ... until women started getting into it.

The same is true for secretaries.

[RichardGarfinkle]

Originally Posted by Chrissy

lol We agree! *cheers*

You know, I've been thinking about health care too, and how it's such a vital, necessary service, and since education, IMO, is right beneath that in terms of necessity (right beneath it.... soooo close) I am flabbergasted by the disparity. How does the dissemination of education fall so drastically below medical care?

But... people go to school to be doctors and make bukoo bucks, and going to school to be a teacher ranks so much lower, financially speaking.

It's messed up. My thinking is that it's because education, grades K-12, is free. Whereas, right now, medical care is dependent on your ability to pay. I'm not happy with that, but I'm struggling here. Are doctors destined to be relegated to the level of teachers, if free medical care is enacted? Not good either. I'd much rather raise the level of teachers to that of doctors, than to lower the level of doctors to teachers.

This could be (even more of) a derail from the OP, and I apologize. It's just a connundrum for me, and I'm trying to figure it out.

I think you're blaming the wrong social problem. The cause here is sexism.

Teaching below the college level in the US was one of the professions primarily occupied by women. Hence it had a lower social status and pay.

In health care the same thing applies to nursing, even though nurses have a ton of training and reponsibility.

[escritora]

Originally Posted by Alessandra Kelley

Teaching was a high prestige, high pay profession ... until women started getting into it.

The same is true for secretaries.

Off topic, but I think you find this article on Male Flight interesting.

[thebloodfiend]

I have to say I agree with you too, Chrissy. Granted, you can't just kick everyone out who doesn't speak a second language, but if you demand higher standards in exchange for higher pay, that might make a difference. I don't believe in "No Child Left Behind" but teachers who bring the best results, especially in poverty inflicted areas, should get the respect they deserve in form of monetary payment.

IMO, education is the most important thing for this country. Teaching jobs shouldn't be a last resort. People should be fighting to get positions as teachers. They should be proud of the position and held up there with doctors and engineers. If that means recommending that teachers learn a second language to further their students cultural progression, which is very important in this world, I'm for it.

Both of my parents are licensed teachers, btw. My dad worked as a teacher for at risk youth in Chicago. Right now, they're working for their M. Ed. They tried to convince me to major in education once upon a time. I didn't agree because of the pay. Some might have a passion to teach, but the salary simply isn't worth it to them.

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by Alessandra Kelley

Teaching was a high prestige, high pay profession ... until women started getting into it.

The same is true for secretaries.

But... there are plenty of women who are doctors. Hasn't changed the prestige (monetarily or otherwise) of medical profession.

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by thebloodfiend

IMO, education is the most important thing for this country. Teaching jobs shouldn't be a last resort. People should be fighting to get positions as teachers. They should be proud of the position and held up there with doctors and engineers. If that means recommending that teachers learn a second language to further their students cultural progression, which is very important in this world, I'm for it.

+1

[muravyets]

Originally Posted by Vince524

No, not in this case, because that's not what they did.

They didn't say, "well Suzy, she's a bright girl, knows her alphabet and not to lick a frozen flag pole, she can handle it. But little Vince524 over there, he's just lucky if he knows to come in out of the rain."

This wasn't a decision made by the teachers teaching the class, it was administrative. All kids.

Because, y'know, all kids have just as good a chance of being able to handle it, right?

And so what if one or two kids really struggle with Spanish, it's not like their math grades, or science grades will suffer because of those times we impart information to them in Spanish?

And parents may not be educators, but good parents still know their kids and also should have a hand in their education.

It's an administrative decision that all kids should learn to read and write, too. Do you think that's over-reaching and that parents should decide when their child can handle becoming literate?

The idea that a parent wouldn't be able to figure out that state departments of education make the curriculum, and then it is (or should be, depending on how hung up on NCLB the area is) up to the teachers to work with their students to see to it that each kid is able to learn the required elements, and up to the local school districts to offer a range of programs with different teaching methods and philosophies to help different types of learners absorb the curriculum, is kind of the reason that I don't think parents should have as much control as some want to give them. At least, some parents shouldn't.

Input, yes. Control? Eh...maybe after a passing a standardized competency test? If they pass, they get to sit in on school board meetings. If not, they have to go back and study how the system works?

ETA: What I'm trying to say is that it being an administrative decision is not the problem, nor does it necessarily mean that good teachers won't be able to help many different kids of different ability levels master the classes.

Originally Posted by Vince524

Yeah, but you couldn't just do that. I mean, many teachers don't speak 2 languages. You can't just toss them out.

Why do you seem so stuck on the idea that everyone will have to speak two languages all the time? Where does this idea come from?

[Yorkist]

Originally Posted by Chrissy

lol We agree! *cheers*

You know, I've been thinking about health care too, and how it's such a vital, necessary service, and since education, IMO, is right beneath that in terms of necessity (right beneath it.... soooo close)

I think it's probably more important, simply because you can have teachers without health care but you cannot have health care without teachers.

I am flabbergasted by the disparity. How does the dissemination of education fall so drastically below medical care?....

But... people go to school to be doctors and make bukoo bucks, and going to school to be a teacher ranks so much lower, financially speaking.

I think the gender issue is a part of it, a big part, but not the whole. I think that teachers are less respected now, and paid lower real wages, than they were 50 years ago, and there are probably more men doing it now than they were 50 years ago. I could be totally wrong about that.

Barriers to entry are a lot lower for teaching than for medical care, and that's partially because society needs a lot more teachers than they need doctors. If barriers for entry were too high and pay too low, we'd have a teacher shortage. That's just economics, and oh wait that's already happened. The only way to provide the number of teachers that society needs is to lower barriers to entry or increase pay. Nobody wants their property or state taxes to go up, so we lower barriers to entry.

I don't think we should require master's degrees because that's just credential inflation, but we should require true subject mastery in undergrad for secondary school teachers. Currently, we don't.

Also, professors have lower real wages and social status than they did 50 years ago. Some of that may be due to gender shakeups, but I think a lot of it is special snowflake-itis.

It's messed up. My thinking is that it's because education, grades K-12, is free.

Private school teachers get paid even less than public school teachers. I can see where your logic is going but I don't think that's it. There are tons of classifications of government employees that make more than teachers.

I'd much rather raise the level of teachers to that of doctors, than to lower the level of doctors to teachers.

You wanna pay more taxes? Because that's what we'd all have to do.

[Vince524]

Originally Posted by muravyets

It's an administrative decision that all kids should learn to read and write, too. Do you think that's over-reaching and that parents should decide when their child can handle becoming literate?

The idea that a parent wouldn't be able to figure out that state departments of education make the curriculum, and then it is (or should be, depending on how hung up on NCLB the area is) up to the teachers to work with their students to see to it that each kid is able to learn the required elements, and up to the local school districts to offer a range of programs with different teaching methods and philosophies to help different types of learners absorb the curriculum, is kind of the reason that I don't think parents should have as much control as some want to give them. At least, some parents shouldn't.

Input, yes. Control? Eh...maybe after a passing a standardized competency test? If they pass, they get to sit in on school board meetings. If not, they have to go back and study how the system works?

ETA: What I'm trying to say is that it being an administrative decision is not the problem, nor does it necessarily mean that good teachers won't be able to help many different kids of different ability levels master the classes.



Why do you seem so stuck on the idea that everyone will have to speak two languages all the time? Where does this idea come from?

It being an administrative decision though, in this case, meant that it wasn't decided that these kids can handle it, but rather this is what they want to do for all kids.

We're not talking about adding something to the curriculum. We're talking about changing how the classrooms work. Making them work in a bilingual way. And any kid that can't master it is going to be in trouble. And their attitude seems to be "too bad, so sad" if you don't like it for as a parent.

Nearly all parents can help kids with the basics of math, reading, etc when kids start school. We're talking the very basics here. But many parents will be clueless in helping their kid with Spanish. This school is in essence making that the most important part of school, if they start using that in other classes.

And that last part you quoted me on was me responding to someone who thought eventually all teachers could be bi-lingual. So I think it was a natural response.

[Chrissy]

Originally Posted by Yorkist

You wanna pay more taxes? Because that's what we'd all have to do.

Here's my plan.

(1) Privatize education. (Bear with me for a second!!!)

(2) Set up an association, The American Teachers' Association (like the American Medical Association, also private, I believe?) that oversees teaching requirements and has a board exam, licensure, etc.--so that the standards for teachers and education services are equal. Over time (so as not hurt existing teachers) increase the standards/requirements for being a teacher, and the related pay. Experienced teachers could be grandfathered into the pay raises.

(3) Use government funds (that previously paid for all education for all children grades K-12) and create Educaid (like Medicaid) for families under a certain income threshold. Now, this assumes that any school will take Educaid--money is money, no matter if it comes from the government or private citizens. Just like doctors take Medicaid. (Or, they should have to, but I'm not sure if that's currently the case).

Okay, go ahead, shoot holes in it.

[Don]

Oh, hell, Chrissy. Next thing we know, you're going to be advocating that people be allowed to shop at the grocery store of their choice, and even choose their own church. What are we gonna do with you?

I've always been kinda fond of the term "School Stamps" myself. Although EducAid has a nice ring to it.

But vouchers are totally unworkable. Except in all the countries that already have school choice.

I'm always surprised at how many people who are convinced other countries have a lot to teach us about healthcare go mum about that concept when education is brought to the table for discussion.

[onuilmar]

Originally Posted by muravyets

I would like to add also that I'm kind of dismayed at the number of responses to this story that suggest that learning languages is a burden, or is not part of basic instruction, or should be optional and not a requirement.

I wish I'd had a program like that when I was in elementary school. I might be able to speak all that French they taught me now, because actually using a language to communicate and achieve an objective, rather just completing foreign language exercises, is a great way to master it.

If you wished you could speak another language, well nothing is stopping you now. Take classes. Work on it.

Yeah, I know it's hard. But guess what, it's also a lot of work for little kids.

I get tired of hearing how it's free for kids. I was immersed. And yeah, now I speak English, but to act like it's a piece of cake to the kid is stupid.

(And I am not ungrateful: I like languages.) But every one wants things easy. Learning requires work. Period. Mastering anything requires work. No one works harder on understanding the world than infants and pre-schoolers.

If learning a language were that easy, then it would not be an issue. Period.