I was the disruptive kid in public school (although I'd blame it on excessive and biased attention from teachers and teachers not in control over their egos) and I was indeed kicked out of class and eventually given the ultimatum of be medicated into submission or be expelled.
The next year I was at the private school across the street. Suddenly I wasn't a problem child anymore there.
I had already been taught algebra at home by first grade. I was in the "gifted program" in public school and the curriculum was still boring and slow. Teachers lasered in on my boredom and made my life miserable despite (or perhaps because of) being able to answer anything. I thrived a little more in private school in part because the children were on-average smarter but also because instead of the school treating everyone like they were special and going to save the world (and rewarding only the kids they liked) they taught children the value of group conformity and not being the nail that sticks up.
>they taught children the value of group conformity and not being the nail that sticks up
That seems like an awful lesson to impose on children. "Keep your head down and don't do anything to attract attention. Go to your grave having spent your life hiding among the faceless crowd".
Shitty teachers that play favorites won't not exist in a private setting. Shitty teachers that demand abject compliance from students to soothe their egos won't not exist in a private setting.
It sounds like a bored student was disrupting the education of 30 others, so teachers punished them more than the other students? They should have probably kicked you ahead a grade if you were so far ahead of your peers, but that would require someone in the situation to attribute your behavior to boredom rather than mere defiance. Did your parents not suggest such a thing? Was it not an option for some other reason? It sounds like a change of environment brought you away from old grievances and that the increased coursework gave you something to do. It's completely possible that a grade skip in the same school could have done the same.
> That seems like an awful lesson to impose on children. "Keep your head down and don't do anything to attract attention. Go to your grave having spent your life hiding among the faceless crowd".
It's a crucial survival skill. You learn when and where in your life to apply it. The "lesson" is that the whole world doesn't revolve around you. Please keep me away from the karens that _haven't_ yet learned that about life.
> It sounds like a bored student was disrupting the education of 30 others, so teachers punished them more than the other students? They should have probably kicked you ahead a grade if you were so far ahead of your peers, but that would require someone in the situation to attribute your behavior to boredom rather than mere defiance. Did your parents not suggest such a thing? Was it not an option for some other reason? It sounds like a change of environment brought you away from old grievances and that the increased coursework gave you something to do. It's completely possible that a grade skip in the same school could have done the same.
Most of my time in that school was fine, I just got unlucky one year and got a nasty old tenured b* of a teacher who decided from day one that she hated me and directed constant negative attention towards me. I just wanted to be left alone. I had had 5 consistent years at that school already without problems, but she was besties with the principal. Later on in her career she got rubberroomed by the school board, so I don't think the problem was me here.
>they taught children the value of group conformity and not being the nail that sticks up
>The "lesson" is that the whole world doesn't revolve around you
These strike me as very different things.
Teaching kids to remain grounded, respectful of others and how to live within an existing system is one thing.
The former sounds like teaching them to avoid garnering attention at all, which is quite another.
I've read about cultures where standing out, for good or bad, is socially punished. "The tallest blade of grass is the first to be mowed down". I would not want us to foster such a culture here.
I could agree with "don't stand out for the wrong reasons".
>Most of my time in that school was fine
It doesn't seem this has much to do with the debate between public and charter schools at all. Just a poor experience you unfortunate enough to have gone through.
What made them like a student over another? Behavior? Ability?
How/why were students they liked rewarded? Teaching is a job, there are tests and many times grading is subjective.
The only factors I thought would come into play are.
1. How much the student tried, cared, or showed interest during class
2. The content of the test (answers-objective, writing-subjective)
3. If they were disruptive in class which normally led to 1 and 2 being negative
What unjustified reasons would a teacher have to show favoritism to a portion of students excluding rare situations like sexual relations and nepotism?
--------
"because instead of the school treating everyone like they were special and going to save the world"
How? When I was in school I went from class to class where the teacher would read material, show examples (i.e.) math, or have a class discussion. Do you mean they inflated grades? Then you wouldn't have done poorly in public school as you said.
If you mean they verbally told students they were doing good when they weren't why would they do that? Public school students have to take standardized test which are so important for the school that it's a common complaint that teachers only teach the test. If this is the case how does rewarding unworthy students benefit the teacher or school. Why would they do that?
----
Your comment hit a nerve because it is very dense with political talking points.
- public school teachers are
corrupt (i.e.favoritism )
- public school teachers are bad at their job
- public school teachers are too soft and treat kids like snowflakes and this has a negative affect.
> What made them like a student over another? Behavior? Ability?
Between my experience and the data I would say it comes down to class and gender, but maybe in the reverse order.
In my primary school education, both public and private, there was a pervasive and often oppressive favoritism towards the girls in just about all situations.
We've been starting to see the results of this in the data for the last couple of decades where men have worse education outcomes by a sizable percentage.
The next year I was at the private school across the street. Suddenly I wasn't a problem child anymore there.
I had already been taught algebra at home by first grade. I was in the "gifted program" in public school and the curriculum was still boring and slow. Teachers lasered in on my boredom and made my life miserable despite (or perhaps because of) being able to answer anything. I thrived a little more in private school in part because the children were on-average smarter but also because instead of the school treating everyone like they were special and going to save the world (and rewarding only the kids they liked) they taught children the value of group conformity and not being the nail that sticks up.