Comments about ‘What schools could do to boost families’

No doubt the free market principles would vastly improve the quality of education. However, the political maneuvering of the current school system pretty well keeps things locked in place. Hopefully the day will come when this concept becomes reality.

1) Lots of schools across the country are already doing many of the things you suggest and more to the best of their abilities... some independently and others through partnerships w/ community agencies.
2) Who is going to pay for more programs and more teachers? My state is setting up slots parlors to fund education. Now there's a plan... the parents of the targeted children will now be out gambling with their welfare checks to fund the education of their own children instead of being home helping w/ their homework.
3) Targeted children in our school system are already walking in the school doors at 7:30 a.m. and walking out at 5:00 p.m. Would you have them sleep over?
Schools can't fix it all.

One very good way to help along good citizenship, via a shared sense of responsibility towards a concrete goal is to assign each classroom janitorial duties. This gives kids an opportunity to work as a team at a goal whose results are visible to everyone. There will be an earned sense of pride or shame depending on how well the team does.

My wife is from a foreign country where they did this very thing. If we did it we could use the money saved to raise teacher pay.

Unfortunately with our country's squeamish attitude about anything with the word 'values' attached to it, I don't see any feasible way that government could agree on what values mattered enough to teach. Let alone the fact that most families that struggle with helping their kids education probably don't have the time (even if it were a "night class"), working extra jobs, single parents, or very unmotivated to learn in the first place due to a bad school experience on their own. Classes don't work if those that need them won't attend.

Linda and Richard should have researched public education and visited Utah schools before writing this very uninformed article. It is based upon assumptions, not on facts.

It is the parent's responsiblity to teach children moral values. The reason students do better in private and charter schools are because these are the parents who care. They have to find a way to get them to school themselves. They have to put out the effort to enroll them. Also, stop blaming the teacher's union. If they were so powerful, why are they paid or poorly? Why do they have the largest class sizes in all of the states? This is a result of the falling apart of the family. Are we going to offer marriage classes at school also? Vouchers? It will be the same as the charter schools, the parents who care will try to get their children into certain schools which can only take so many students. Although there is some merit in this article, I strongly disagree with many of its assumptions.

I don't agree with many of the arguements presented.

The biggest thing is the involvement of parents with kids in charter schools and private schools. They seem to imply that because their kids go to charter or private schools that the parents then become more involved. From what I have seen, it is usually the parents that are concerned about their kids schooling that enroll their kids in charter or private schools. You still have the countless number of parents that don't care, and a new program through the school will not get them to care or become more involved.

The problem lies in the home. If you can get the parents to care, then the benefits will follow. The problem is that no number of government/school programs will get the parents to care, if anything it will annoy them and end up with them badmouthing the schools and teachers.

I like the general tone and ideas of this article, but see a lot of flaws in its practical applications.

Laura and Red Shirt are completely right. If a parent cares enough about his child's education to enroll them in a charter or private school, he/she will automatically be more involved, and therefore, that child will do better.

Studies show, however, that when you compare children of equal socio-economic levels, those in public schools do was well as those in private institutions, and don't have to fork out $15,000 a year (or more). I'd like to know where the statistics are that show charter schools are doing better, as well. I've seen some other data that may indicate otherwise, depending of the individual school, of course.

And although it would be nice to educate the parents about proper parenting, what parent is (1) has the time for classes, (2) wants to admit that he/she is deficient, or (3) has the language skills to help their children?

Finally, our weak local teacher organizations are paper tigers. It's the legislature that controls the purse strings which is the problem.

Typical Eyre article--smiling as they pretend to understand, then bullet point a few solutions that are so easy why didn't I think of it in the first place. They throw out the usual conservative anti-public education arguments and then proceed to answer them with ideas that only serve to further weaken and undermine the ideals of a publicly-provided education, committed to educating all--even those with poor family backgrounds and "uncaring" parents.

First, there is already a "provision" to allow persons leaving other professions to enter education--it is called "alternative route to liscensure" (ARL). Problem, people oftern find that being an effective teacher involves much more than just knowing a lot about their "field of expertise".

Then the Eyre's pull out the Holy grail of conservatives - vouchers. With no reference he just states that private and charter school (which are public schools by the way) OFTEN achieve higher test scores than public schools. Well, they also OFTEN don't. What's the point?

He also says they do this with less money? Really? Students and teachers at Waterford acheive this with the same money given by our state to public education? Utah is already at the bottom of all states in the amount spent on public education. Can you really sit there smiling thinking we can get even better results with less money?

There is not anough room to even answer his naive comments about the voucher idea, but transferring money from the public to the private is a fundamental shift in accountability and purpose in our society. Where does he think the profits demanded by privatization wil come from? He thinks we just need to "convert" to the idea and then everything will be all better.

I find a lot of the comments here to be offensive to wonderful public school educators, and the parents of children who attend public schools. And I, as a teacher, do not want to teach many of the skills mentioned in the article. I want to be home, working with my own kids. I find many of the suggestions in this article to be short-sighted and reprehensible.

1. It is our very own morality police-the Eagle Forum - that cries the loudest against schools teaching values. In spite of their cries, most schools do incorporate character education already.
2. Vouchers are a problem not a solution. Utah voters saw through the voucher scam years ago and are insulted that the scam keeps popping up. There are a few states that have had vouchers for years. Academic achievement is still pretty much the same everywhere, and both private and charter schools often have lower scores (if that's important to you) than the public schools, especially when students with similar SES are compared.
3. Politicians not teachers are responsible for the debacle that has been NCLB with its narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers would love to be able to teach the whole child again, but parents will need to change who the politicians are for that to happen.

Our children are in school to long and lack time to become individuals. Forty or more hours per week, denies our young their childhood and is abusive. Thomas Edison would have been hindered with our current system of test and accountability.

**'Boy, 15, reprimanded for backing traditional family in school paper' - By Joshua Bolding, Deseret News - 01/27/12

'He (Wegner) also quoted scriptures like Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death...' article

Promote families. Fine!

But do NOT resort to insulting others familes, to do it.

That, is bullying. Plain and simple.