Ohio senator's proposed legislation could add 38 days to school year

[bkroz]

Here's my viewpoint on the subject. The days do not matter, rather, it is the teaching administered. The goal is for the students to pass the final exam and to learn, not make them "serve" a sentence for school incentives. Which on the serve point, WCPO, really? That right there makes me upset, a high school student is not serving a class to pass, rather better diction, or word choice, would be enrolled, required to take.

The education system rather should have changes, not days. For example, Charlie's school has x hours of school, and he learns from old text books. Billy's school has y hours of school, and he learns from new text books and reinvented teaching techniques. Charlie's school has more hours, yet he fails, Billy's school has less hours, yet he passes. Education for the workplace, education with College credit (AP comes to mind). Now, after a change of the administration of the knowledge, and further changes are needed, sure go on to add a few more days, just without the days that students do nothing in.

Obviously it should be quality over quantity. I, too, am a licensed teacher of special education. This is going to be long so I'm spoiler-tagging it. If you're interested in the inside view, expand.

Imagine being a teacher.

You have 30 students.

5 of the students have diagnosed special needs and are on an IEP, which is a federal, legal document entitling that child to specific, unique treatment with measurable objectives that must (read that word again: must) be met annually. You may or may not have access to special education teacher regularly, semi-regularly, or occasionally. Your exposure to special needs before teaching might include a single introductory level class on teaching exceptional children, if your university is progressive enough to require that. If you graduated outside of the last ten years, probably not. Jenny's on an IEP, and her parents call once every few weeks to check on her IEP goals. They also want written communication home from you - the teacher - every day to discuss which IEP goals she worked on. They also ask that you maintain a homework planner for her that can go home with her every day with due dates and details for all upcoming assignments at least two weeks out.

5 of the students have undiagnosed special needs, and are falling behind. Your job is to monitor, record, and report those students' (quantitatively and qualitatively) as they progress through the tiers of RTI - Response to Intervention - so that if they might qualify, they can be forwarded to a special education teacher (who can then go through the exhaustive process of communicating with a family who does not want to hear that their child has special needs and refuses to participate in the process). Keep in mind that these undiagnosed children will probably be the ones to act out all day, disrupt class, and hide behind humor or worse. Nathan's in fifth grade. Every teacher suspects that he has high-functioning autism. He has few friends and little social understanding, but he looks normal. He just likes to sit in the corner and play with putty while everyone else takes notes. He says he doesn't need to take notes because his mom helps him with his homework at home. Last year his teacher mentioned that Nathan should be referred for testing because he might have special needs, and his mom went ballistic and said her son doesn't need special ed.

5 of the students are "gifted." They've finished their homework before you've explained it and want to know what they should do now. They finish their tests first, they don't listen in class because they don't need to, and they're bored. One of your five gifted students is James. James' parents feel that you - as a teacher - aren't doing what you should be doing to keep their son engaged. Their James is bright and can go far, and he's being dragged down by a curriculum that favors the slow-learners. They want you to spend extra time with James outside of class, because it's not fair that he's just told to read a novel while you work with the kids with special needs. He can read a novel at home. What are they sending him to you for if all you can do is tell him to read a novel?

The other 15 are average performing. Not falling behind, not gifted. Each has a unique learning style. Some are visual, others are auditory. Some need planners and supervision keeping their space organized and neat, while others are fiercely independent. 9 of the 15 are stronger in math than in reading, while the other 6 are stronger in reading than math. Each has unique needs and strengths, though, so teaching something one way is simply not an option.

All 30 are dealing with home lives that may or may not include older siblings, younger siblings, divorce, marriage, re-marriage, abuse, step-siblings, working parents, extended family issues, sick grandparents, adult responsibilities, job losses at home, etc. They may come to school hungry, distracted, exhausted from being up all night. They may not have bedtimes. They may drink soda for breakfast (trust me). They may have no structure at home: no opportunity to do homework even if they wanted to. Their parents may not value education in the slightest. Maybe they're promised that they can drop out immediately on their 16th birthday. They're involved in sports, relationships, gangs, local clubs.

Fantastic! Easy! Now, go home and design a week of lessons (one a day for math, reading, writing, science, and history) that meet targeted state standards, are accessible to all the cognitive levels in your classroom, can be expanded upon and deepened easily for gifted kids without just giving them "extra work," that special education kids can still get and that align with their IEP goals (which you didn't design) wherever applicable. Every lesson in every subject needs to keep the attention of the gifted kids without alienating the low-performers.

Oh, and don't forget to get each of those students to pass the OAA test. You will be judged on their scores. Your pay be raised or lowered based on the way those students perform on this single test at the end of the year. The test strongly leans on reading comprehension and grade level mathematics. What will you focus on in lessons? How much time will you spend on art? science? history? social studies? physical education? Will you model your in-class activities and tests after the style of the OAA? How much time will you take teaching your students how to make good guesses on a test? How much time will you spend teaching them the exact things you know will be on the OAA instead of the things they'll need next year, next decade?

1/3 of your class is low-performing, either identified as having special needs or suspected but unidentified. They're going to bomb the exam if left on their own, and your pay may go right down with them. Your gifted kids will pass no problem. Your average performers will be fine. Who will you cater your curriculum to?

You work 7 AM - 3 PM on a good day, then go home and design curriculum, build lessons, and grade homework. And don't forget to spend extra time with James and his gifted peers, and come in for IEP meetings. For $32,000 a year. And for parents to tell you you're not doing a good job and that it's your fault their kids are not reaching their full potential. When you're actually inside a classroom, things like hours vs. days don't make a difference at all. Class sizes swell while teachers' pay shrinks and the public practically revolts against them like they're the enemy. Like they should be doing more. Like it's so simple.

"Those who can, do; those who can't, teach."

[shark6495]

Agreed. I may be one of the few on here who can speak on special education, but we see the lack of foundational skills all of the time.

To do what you mentioned sky rider we need to stop treating schools like a business. Meaning we need to invest in schools. Higher more teachers, offer before and after school programs, bring in tutors, etc. unfortunately the word accountability begins to be thrown around.

Many teachers would advise against young people becoming teachers. This is sad to me.

If we are to measure individual growth, why compare it to a national standard? If we know what works (smaller classrooms, hands on, multiple modality teaching) why doesn't this happen.

I agree with you that from birth to kindergarten educational personnel must outreach to all families.

[Skyrider]

Agreed. I may be one of the few on here who can speak on special education, but we see the lack of foundational skills all of the time.

To do what you mentioned sky rider we need to stop treating schools like a business. Meaning we need to invest in schools. Higher more teachers, offer before and after school programs, bring in tutors, etc. unfortunately the word accountability begins to be thrown around.

Many teachers would advise against young people becoming teachers. This is sad to me.

If we are to measure individual growth, why compare it to a national standard? If we know what works (smaller classrooms, hands on, multiple modality teaching) why doesn't this happen.

I agree with you that from birth to kindergarten educational personnel must outreach to all families.

It is always interesting to me how they know that hands on is a great teaching tool to use but when it comes to high stake tests the students are not allowed to use them. Also students that have Individual Education Plans (IEPs) are often expected to take the exact same assessment as students that are not on IEPs. Is this fair to the student and fair to evaluate the teacher on these test results? Two years from now they expect 100% of the students to pass these high stake tests--sometimes it seems like they think students are robots that can be programmed with knowledge. All of the worlds problems will be fixed by then I suppose, that have an affect on a child's education and their readiness to learn---I am all for accountability but 100% of the students--if not lets point our finger at the teacher. Poverty, truancy, and transient students (breaking up continuity in their educational program) all have negative affects on a child's education and teachers cannot control these factors.

[shark6495]

I have one kiddo who can't read and was referred for speech and language services. He has been to 12 schools in 9 years........ Yet within a year we are suppose to fix the 9 years of problems.... My heart breaks for these kiddos.

[bkroz]

All students have to take standardized tests because before that was written in cement - back when an IEP granted permission to skip the test - schools (naturally, if amorally) took any and all low-achieving students and assigned them a special education label. Any troublemaker or low-achiever was given an IEP for a learning disability, or "other health impairment." Their IEP would simply say "complete grade level appropriate curriculum with peers with extra time on unit assessments in language arts" or something like that. So nothing had to actually be done on the school's part, but they "qualified for special ed," which got them out of the standardized test and raised the school's scores.

The result was kids being labeled inappropriately just to keep school's scores high. So now, everyone takes the test. Period.

[shark6495]

Wrong.... Not all kids have to. Some Kids on IEPs take what's called alternate assessments, still to this day.

If a school used them to avoid bad reports then every single teacher that knew about it deserves to have their licenses revoked.

To be classified as a CD, SLD, OHI or any other "label" there are some strict guidelines.

And what exactly does a standardized test do? It shows where there are gaps, that's about it.

The line that teachers teach to the test is ridiculous. Why wouldn't a teacher teach someone to pass a test?

[bkroz]

If you are on an IEP, you take the standardized test. If you have extreme extenuating circumstances, an alternative assessment may be given with permissions first if that's written into the IEP. There are exceptions, but in general you cannot get out of a standardized test if you can take it with accommodations. Students with cognitive disabilities still take the standardized test in MOST situations. The first choice is ALWAYS to take the test with accommodations. Some kids have alternate assessments, but this is not common or easy to do. It is sincerely called "The 1% Rule." Only 1% of a district's students may be deemed proficient by the use of an alternate assessment. THAT is federal law.

Some of the labels you listed are based on a medical doctor's diagnosis - a vast majority of OHI diagnoses are AD/HD. IDEA cites OHI as disorders causing students to "have limited strength, vitality, or alertness, including a heightened alertness to environmental stimuli, that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational environment, that— (a) is due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma, attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition, hemophilia, lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis [a kidney disorder], rheumatic fever, sickle cell anemia, and Tourette syndrome; and adversely affects a child’s educational performance." Oh yeah, super strict. If you have limited OR heightened alertness in an educational environment and your educational performance is affected, you qualify for OHI according to IDEA.

Students were labeled with this haphazardly to keep low-performers from having to take standardized tests. Those teachers should be stripped of their licenses? If you say so. Teachers didn't want their own scores to plummet (and now, it affects their salary, too), and doing what they did put low-performing kids in a position to get federally-assured help. Right? Wrong? Black and white? If you say so. Any science teacher will tell you to isolate the variable. Students are affected by thousands of variables every hour, but teachers pay is lowered if they don't do well on standardized tests? Hmm...

"Teach to the test." You're obviously not understanding the way the phrase is used. The idea here is that teachers would like to teach students a certain curriculum, but because of the high stakes testing, they have to 1) focus only on the concepts that the high stakes standardized test will cover and not the applicable, real-life lessons they'd like to teach; and they have to 2) spend valuable educational time teaching students how to take a standardized test. That is, how to eliminate wrong answers from a series of four choices; how long a 2-point OAA extended response answer is expected to be vs. the length of a 4-point OAA extended response answer; how to answer x amount of questions in a y amount of time; what key words to include in short answer questions; how to format a short answer or extended response question according to OAA guidelines, etc. I'm a licensed special education teacher in the state of Ohio. I had to use a whole lot of class time teaching my students the expectations of an extended response question and how to use the grid paper provided on the OAA to write paragraphs. That's not what my students should've been tested on, or what my effectiveness as a teacher should be judged on.

Of course we want students to pass tests. The question is, is the test worthwhile? Standardized tests, we're lead to believe, are valid and reliable (in terms of the scientific meaning of those words). But if a teacher would like to teach her students (say, a 6th grade special education class on IEPS) how to balance a checkbook but must instead teach long division without a calculator because that's what the 6th grade OAA requires. Do you see? Does that make sense? "Teaching the test" means that teachers are forced to change their curriculum to match the test instead of the test matching their curriculum. It's top-down management.

[shark6495]

Right and a district can have more than 1% take the test but they still get dinged. Secondly a student can be excused from the test after making 3 attempts at passing the OGTs (I work mostly with HS IEP kiddos). However, if you are excused from the consequences most colleges will not take you. Depending on your district it is very easy for Alternate Assessment to be assigned. It's all part of an IEP team. The testing for alternate assessment is hard on staff.

My line about teaching to the test is In defense to the teacher. Why wouldn't a teacher teach kids how to pass the OGTs or the OAAs when their ability to continue to have a job is directly linked to the passing scores on said test.

Standardized testing is nothing more than showing you some strengths and weaknesses when compared to same ages peers. I use standardized test scores every day in my position. However it's only 1/3 of a students profile, so believe me, I understand the limitations of standardized testing.

And if a teacher wants to teach about the checkbook then there is no reason a math unit cannot be dedicated to that. even while preparing for OGTs or OAAs. It takes a bit of wrangling but it can be done.

(Goodyellow I do appreciate where you are coming from and enjoy this good debate, I am coming from a position of an SLP working in special ed in one of the lowest school districts in the state of Ohio)

[shark6495]

Double post:

I just read GYK essay on what it's like to be a teacher on the classroom..... Yup.

The only thing I would say is why does the reg ed teacher have anything to do with the IEP goals? Usually the intervention specialist handles that area. Or at least should.

Some learning for all you who have no idea how IEPs are formed, aka the non educators in here:

Johnny is referred for help after the RTI process. The school psych, SLP, and others test Johnny. While at the same time gather work samples and interviews.

They then come up with a list of things he can do (strengths) and things he can't do (weaknesses). They compare this list to the content standards (same aged peers are expected to answer literal questions....) and write up the ETR. The ETR results/summary is then used to write the IEP....

[stashua123]

I am a student and just NO about this plan! I think school should not be all of a sudden radically changed. That does not work out well(Big ex: Common Core). Common Core may have been "revolutionary" but it has led to many problems in our school system. You can't change the system all of a sudden.

[jcgoble3]

Common Core? Did someone say Common Core?

http://madworldnews.com/angry-mother-destroys-common-core-writing-sons-test/

[disco2000]

Great discussion, and glad to see we are at two pages and it hasn't really turned to personal attacks (yet, but let's hope not)!

For those not in education, Goodyellowkorn182 has given in his spoiler post above a pretty realistic account of what a teacher deals with. Add on top of that SLO paperwork, and a bunch of other mandates that take time away from preparing lessons, and you have the life of a teacher.

Like so many instances, the federal government that is here to help has managed to increase the problem. And it just isn't in education. Look at the now defunct (at least in southwest Ohio) air emission testing that you had to take your vehicle to in order to get renewed - it didn't improve air quality and is one of the few things that actually got rescinded.

Look at your sewer bills increasing because the government is making wasterwater treatment plants meet almost unattainable permit limits (most that are already producing treated wastewater that is close to drinkable), when a single cow dropping manure in a creek as it walks through puts more contaminants into the creek that 10 years worth of treated wastewater. Same with all the fertilizer going on lawns and crops. We are spending billions to put extra treatment in place on an already effective treatment system, yet the cows can dump away and we can over-fertilize our yards to get them nice and green and that run-off collectively in one rain event is worse than a lifetime of treated water from the poop plant. The wrong source is being targeted for the fix.

The same goes with education - as long as the government keeps coming up with common core and standardized testing and what not, they continue to target the wrong source. Teachers can only do so much. The government needs to be targeting the parents. So many parents do not care, and even if they do, they simply do not have the time, will power, or education to become involved with their child's education. And a lot of parents consider school as day care, so those that don't want to deal with their children in the summer are all for year round schooling. Let's face it, with so many dual-income families, something has to give. And the single parent has it even worse because there probably is zero disposable income left for tutoring, etc.

Why punish the teachers for poor test scores. If Johnny is doing poorly in school, the parents pay more. And to all the single moms living off the government having kids by multiple partners (because well our current "hand-out" system pays more per kid), you lose that funding. That is a whole other topic, but when the system is set up that you can get government hand-outs that financially are better off than a minimum wage job, why wouldn't an uneducated, or possible drop-out, exploit that opportunity?

Once you are able to hold the parents accountable, a lot will change. But we will probably never see that happen as politicians like to keep their comfy job, and let's face it, there are more parents out there that vote than there are teachers, so which one are they going to "cater" to?

And to those saying "our test scores are not as well as other countries", I encourage you to go visit one of those countries for yourself and tell me if they are better off or are we. The child suicide rate is through the roof; you have to travel two-hours one way to go to work for low pay; cheating in school is more prevalent than here; your living conditions suck; but you supposedly can ace a math test. Next I encourage you to talk to students from one of these countries and ask them why they came to the USA to go to college - and have a real conversation with them and you will find out that they are "taught to the test" more than we could ever envision and in that respect, they do put teachers here to shame (if having the ability to teach to a test is the stick with which to measure a teacher!). Of course there are exceptions, but many of these students that come to the USA struggle with the idea of "having to think on their own" because they were not taught that. If they haven't seem an exact similar example, they are stuck. And this has nothing to do with a language barrier. That is the direction our education system is moving towards.

[Dalefan]

Here are the 3 big problems with making the school days longer that no one sees. You have to pay the teachers, the buildings would need to run the normal things like gas, electric, water and air and you have the people who do the maintenance work on the buildings during the summers. 2 of those problems require the school systems and the residents to pay out more money which they won't do. Some cities already charge too much on property tax for schools now. The State Of Ohio needs to put the issue of making the days longer on the ballot. Let us who pay the taxes for the schools vote on it.

[TTD-120-420]

No offense, but that may be the worst statement I have ever read from you.

What sort of useless stuff are you speaking of? I mean schools have already gotten rid of shop classes, most schools are getting rid of theater and/or music. Heck, art in most places is enough to just have 1 or 2 classes in your academic career.

I'm talking about how students are taught to the test, primarily. I really feel like students are taught "nice to know" information rather than "need to know" information. I high school graduate knows how to diagram a sentence but doesn't learn how to file taxes. They can tell you about the themes of Beowulf but now how to prevent ruining their credit history before the age of 25.

College is even worse. WAY too many gen ed classes that have nothing to do with your field of study. Of course, you have to pay for each class so it works well in their favor.

Preach! OSU made me take a course last semester over Shakespeare. Why is this needed? How will that ever help me? All it did was make OSU $900 or whatever the ridiculous cost was.

[disco2000]

No offense, but that may be the worst statement I have ever read from you.

What sort of useless stuff are you speaking of? I mean schools have already gotten rid of shop classes, most schools are getting rid of theater and/or music. Heck, art in most places is enough to just have 1 or 2 classes in your academic career.

I'm talking about how students are taught to the test, primarily. I really feel like students are taught "nice to know" information rather than "need to know" information. I high school graduate knows how to diagram a sentence but doesn't learn how to file taxes. They can tell you about the themes of Beowulf but now how to prevent ruining their credit history before the age of 25.

College is even worse. WAY too many gen ed classes that have nothing to do with your field of study. Of course, you have to pay for each class so it works well in their favor.

Preach! OSU made me take a course last semester over Shakespeare. Why is this needed? How will that ever help me? All it did was make OSU $900 or whatever the ridiculous cost was.

Regarding College - a lot of that depends on the major. With some colleges offering over 200 majors, some like philosophy and most Arts & Science degrees are going to be packed with general education type classes. Contrast that with engineering or medicine where the current accreditation has it too focused and the current crop of students are missing out by not being able to take electives that are not specifically related to their degree. Almost every major would benefit by taking a public speaking course, a law course, a basic business related course, and an elective or two of something that interests you.

[XGatorHead 8904]

Regarding Common Core:

GatorGirl is in 4th grade this year and in the accelerated math class. A couple of weeks ago she asked me to help with one of her multiplication homework questions. She gave me the paper and asked me, "What are the partial products for this one?" I just looked at her and asked, "What's a partial product?" Once she explained it to me I understood it, but I couldn't tell you what it is now.

When I learned multiplication, there were no "partial products". There was one product: the answer. I felt bad that I couldn't help her, and I brought that up to the teacher during our fall conference. Luckily, the following week they were learning multiplication the way we learned it. I'm lucky that I have Mrs. Gator, who was a Math Education major for a while and graduated with a degree in Elementary Ed (but doesn't teach... she works for a textbook publisher) is able to help her with it more than I can. When it comes to history, science or literature, then I'll be ready to help. It looks like we may be visiting friends in Maryland and going to D.C. with them next summer... I can impart my knowledge then.

[shark6495]

Partial products are a way to teach multiplication to make it faster. So if you were multiplying 99x4, you could do it as (90x4)+(9x4)=360+36=396.

If you haven't had a chance to read the common core I would suggest to do so. The core doesn't mention a specific way to learn but it does present bench marks.

Here is a link to the math common core: http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Ohio-s-New-Learning-Standards/Mathematics/Math-Standards.pdf.aspx

The partial product also looks like it is a way to test for some of the common core standards of Operations and Algebraic Thinking.

The problem we should be having with common core is that it's not all based on developmental norms. The teaching style is not dictated directly by the core.

[DegenRider]

There is also another reason this is a very bad idea. Most of the schools in Ohio are older and lack AC. I know my elementry school lacked it and no learning was done when the inside of the classroom was over 100F. Fan's only helped so much. If anything we need more technology for teaching that way you can change things up for kids who need more or who need help.

I had an IEP in school. Apparently if i go back to college its still valid. I did the same tests everyone else did. This was back in late 90's early 00's.

[KIfan73]

I think much of what we're seeing in education is simply a result of supply and demand. You see stories of kids in other places walk for miles to learn in a hut, because there is nothing else. In America, you can barely show up for class, not turn in a thing, and there's office after office of professionals waiting in line to intervene to ensure you eventually receive a diploma. Money keeps being poured into it, but when is that ever the answer?

[The Interpreter]

We learned "new math" in 1965. Partial products were part of that.

Everything old is new again.

Those who don't learn [from] history are doomed to repeat it, Henry Ford not withstanding.

[BeastForever]

As a student, I can tell you that my brain is FRIED towards the end of the school year, there's no way I would be able to do much more after that if it was so required.

I need as much summer as I can in order to relax, work as a caddy at my local country club, make money for college, learn invaluable life skills that cannot be taught in school during said caddying job, and also hopefully earn a full college scholarship from caddying...

And also, if there's anything I've learned over my career as a student, it's that it's not necessarily the amount of time spent inside the school building that correlates to how much you learn, it's what YOU make out of that time determines how much you learn.

"God helps those who help themselves"...

[The Interpreter]

I will be the first to admit that my 60+ hours a week job in high school (yes, you read that right, no--that wasn't allowed for minors, but...) taught me more of use to me in college, grad school and life than high school ever did.

High school was, for me, a marvelous waste of time, for the most part. I literally slept through much of it. And still had like a 3.89 back in the days that 4.0 was the max.

[homestar92]

^ I'm in this same boat. High school was very easy for me. I breezed through classes with little to no effort and maintained a 3.84 GPA. I suppose that after all is said and done, I should be grateful, as my GPA and my ACT scores (32 composite) earned me a full-tuition scholarship to college, where I actually learned things that had some appeal to me and felt challenged and motivated to learn (not to mention, expanded my social bubble FAR more than I ever did in high school).

I'm no education expert. I can't even begin to comment on all of these matters with the same level of expertise and knowledge that some on this site have demonstrated. However, there is one glaring problem I see with public schools, and it isn't just Ohio, it's all over the country. And pardon me, but I'll be getting on my soap box for a moment. Schools need to embrace technology, and in some ways, they are beginning to do so. And yet, very, very few schools in this country offer classes on computer programming. Frankly, I think one entry-level course in the subject SHOULD be required for all students just as we require art, music, and sometimes foreign languages, but at very least, I just wish it were offered at all. I went into college with literally zero knowledge in my field of study. Frankly, it was complete conjecture as to whether it was really a field I would even like to be in. I think it's a crime that American students don't get this opportunity. Especially now in this age of iPads and Androids, computers have been dumbed down to a point where you need no technical knowledge at all to use one. In some ways, that's fantastic. In others, it's truly frightening.

As a young kid, the only computer I had access to was my dad's old 286. If I wanted to play a game or write a document, I had to use floppy disks and navigate the command line, and by the age of seven, I was more or less fluent on a DOS prompt. Had we had the money (or need) for a newer computer at that time that DIDN'T require this kind of technical knowledge, I would have learned almost nothing about how a computer actually works, and I would have been far more disadvantaged going into college than I was. If we want to keep innovating, we need the next generation to have an opportunity to learn these skills. I witnessed the culture shock of my peers having to use a command line for the first time to compile their code in my freshman year of college. This was a generation that grew up right as that era of computing was coming to an end, and a generation that would have had at least a small amount of exposure to that sort of thing. Imagine what will happen when we have a world of people whose only computing knowledge involves tapping an icon and we need developers to make the next big software breakthrough. Everyone has different skills and interests, and technology is not the road to a career for every student. But it's where the money is, and will be for the foreseeable future, and if we as a nation aren't raising a generation prepared to excel in this area, the economic ramifications could be devastating.

OK, I'll get off my soap box now.

[shark6495]

The problem with that is that at many many public schools money is very very tight.

At the shook I work at we have a total of 3 computer carts with 30 laptops in each.... Teachers have to reserve these for the students to use.

Plus mAny of my students do not have access to a computer at home. They have their phones at that is their internet.

[homestar92]

^ Which is why it's an issue that I wish taxpayers could see the importance of. If we, as a nation, are willing to fund the teaching of computer skills, the money will come back into our economy via the products that it will enable us to produce.

The other problem though is that frankly, our schools seem to be underfunded across the board, and I think taxpayers (and the schools themselves) would probably have other areas that they feel are more important to allocate money to than technology. And maybe they're right. I don't have the expertise to know the answer to that. Ah well. I suppose in a worst-case scenario, it's just job security for me.

[BloodBlade21]

... And a lot of parents consider school as day care, so those that don't want to deal with their children in the summer are all for year round schooling...

"School" should be read as Kings Island, movie theaters, malls, etc.

[shark6495]

^ Which is why it's an issue that I wish taxpayers could see the importance of. If we, as a nation, are willing to fund the teaching of computer skills, the money will come back into our economy via the products that it will enable us to produce.

The other problem though is that frankly, our schools seem to be underfunded across the board, and I think taxpayers (and the schools themselves) would probably have other areas that they feel are more important to allocate money to than technology. And maybe they're right. I don't have the expertise to know the answer to that. Ah well. I suppose in a worst-case scenario, it's just job security for me.

You are right on. I work in an under performing district but we have newer (10 yrs) buildings. I spend time in other districts and some schools are fighting to keep the roof from leaking in.

A district I know of can't afford curriculum for its CD classrooms. Times are tough.

In business if a worker doesn't work or a cog breaks down you can replace it with a different one. If a student doesn't want to work, educators have to find ways to motivate and help that student succeed. So treating schools like a business, where funding only goes to well performing schools, hurts the over all education of America.

[Outdoor Man]

This bill isn't going anywhere. Ohio would be responsible for killing entire industries.

This is a classic instance of a politician trying to play cozy to seem like he's PRO-Education with no regard for the overall health of the economy (of how it works), which by the way funds the educational system.

[The Interpreter]

It's always good to read the entire thread...

That being said, yes, it's grandstanding. So was Common Core....

[TTD-120-420]

I will be the first to admit that my 60+ hours a week job in high school (yes, you read that right, no--that wasn't allowed for minors, but...) taught me more of use to me in college, grad school and life than high school ever did.

High school was, for me, a marvelous waste of time, for the most part. I literally slept through much of it. And still had like a 3.89 back in the days that 4.0 was the max.

I'm in this boat, also. I learned more from this website, sports, and jobs than I ever did in high school. High school was where I took some of the best naps of my life, though!

Investing in computers and iPads for schools does nothing the way they are being used now. I rarely used the computers for actual class work. It was mostly this site, fantasy football, and just mindless internet surfing. The only thing of use I ever learned from the high school computers was Photoshop.