Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Immigration and its negative impact on education in the USFollow

#1 Feb 10 2004 at 11:36 AM Rating: Good
Ok, here's one we haven't tackled in a while...

POTUS wants a less restrictive work visa program for 3rd world, I mean Mexican laborers to cross in to the US. Schools in this country are already overburdoned with non-english speakers requiring additional assistance, keeping english speaking students back due to the lack of attention from their teachers.

The influx of new immigrants, en mass in some cases, due to refugee programs, etc., will put a greater burdon on an already taxed system. This being the case, how can people of means be expected to leave their children in a system that is required to pander to the lowest common denominator? How long will the education system in America remain in place as it is today, under-equipped to deal with the burdon? People are correct in fearing that a voucher system will severely impact public schools, but why are we continuing to try and save something that is clearly broken? Why keep pumping money in to an enlarging hole?

EDIT:
So, the affirmative is...
Immigration is a negative influence on our public education system.

The negative is...
Immigration is not a negative influence on our public education system.

Edited, Tue Feb 10 11:49:34 2004 by MoebiusLord
#2 Feb 10 2004 at 12:06 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
I think that the main negative influence on anything is lack of motivation. I remember coming here at 14 and being put in remedial classes, even though my English was better than most people in regular classes. A year later I got tired of reading books that a fourth grader would read and taking dumb tests ("What color was Shadow?"), and I had my mom drive me to get tested, joined the gifted/talented program, and got the hell out of classes where people assumed that my skin color meant I was a a dumbass. My country is backwards in a lot of respects, but I was doing algebra in the third grade.

Language is a barrier that any intelligent person can overcome, but it doesn't mean that they are somehow less intelligent, they are just less motivated. It used to be that people left and they were leaving for good... Now with planes and transportation being so easy, it's harder for them to make that definitive break that would necessitate making a 90-degree turn, and so their motivation to learn English, for example, lags. They honestly think they're going home.

Oh and btw, as far as I knew, certification for ESL Teaching Creds and regular ones are two different things, right? ESL kids are kept separate, so what's hurting the other kids is overcrowding, lack of funding, etc... All the usual suspects?

Tare, help me out. I know you're a teacher. What's your view?

Edited for Spelling

Edited, Tue Feb 10 12:17:38 2004 by Atomicflea
#3 Feb 10 2004 at 12:35 PM Rating: Excellent
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,291 posts
An influx on newly immigrated children into the school system does present a whole unique set of challenges for teachers, parents and students alike. As teachers, we are responsible for providing a fair and quality education to all students that walk through the door, regardless of ability or origin, and oftentimes in terrible, unsupportive working conditions. That being said, I think Flea is right. Apathy and laziness are the orders of the day in education, on that part of all players. Administration want teachers to work longer hours, give more and maintain governed standards, but offer no support to teachers faced every year with 35+ kids in their classroom. Parents want the best education for their children and are becoming alarmed with class sizes, general poor quality of education and a very real apathy on the part of teachers. The easy thing to do is to shuffle those "backward" kids away from your classroom and have a few less to worry about. I honestly don't think immigration is the problem, and even if it were, how can you deny immigrated children the same quality of education that everyone else gets? It's lack of funding, lack of support from parents and administration and a whole lot of teachers who just don't really care about your kids.

Btw, Flea, I hate hearing stories like yours. Stupid jackass teachers.
____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#4 Feb 10 2004 at 1:02 PM Rating: Decent
I agree MoebiusLord,

But the sad truth is that they cannot see this becuase of the almighty dollar.

Opening the borders means more consumers to a country that is nothing BUT consumers.

It fills jobs that none of us will fill becuase of low pay and zero benefits that we "feel" is the american way.

One more postion at Wall Mart filled
One more auto purchased to get to work
One more tank to fill with gas
One more "Low income" home purchased
One more living room to feel with electronics
One more Dinner at TGI Fridays
One more taxpayer

This is all they see, sad but the truth none the less.


Edited, Tue Feb 10 13:03:39 2004 by thegeek
#5 Feb 10 2004 at 1:15 PM Rating: Good
Edited because of boredom



Edited, Tue Feb 10 13:17:33 2004 by Leiany
#6 Feb 10 2004 at 1:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Edited because of boredom


Come on, join the fray! :)

I am growing tired of the evolution thing. I need new controversy.
#7 Feb 10 2004 at 2:21 PM Rating: Decent
Some of you may disagree, but I feel I speak English very well.

I too was placed in ESL at a young age for being brown. In 6th grade, I went from my normal English class that I was doing well in, to an ESL class where I was discussing "The tall man's red hat".

Personally, I wouldn't mind a less restrictive visa program, maybe then the ESL classes would have actual "English as a second language" students instead of quiet, shy, English speaking boys who know a little bit of Spanish and have brown skin.

Another sad thing, not all immigrants are going to schools buddy.

There was an interesting article in the paper a while ago about Hispanic immigrates, average scenario is "if you are healthy, and can do manual labor, you drop out of school and work to provide money for the family".

I say let them come, encourage them to go to school, then maybe perhaps they'll get a better grasp of the language, and get jobs that pay more than minimum wage.
#8 Feb 10 2004 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
***
1,257 posts
Okay this is slightly, well no okay well way off topic but bear with me a sec.

We have a news story over here today about a man who killed an eleven year old in a car on new years day. He was charged with dangerous driving and failing to report- or something like that. Well he wass sentenced, but today it the story was that his sentence was cut because the magistrate sentenced to serve a term longer than he was allowed.


Now to the point, this man was an asylum seeker who had had his application turned down and was here on a false passport.

So what is all i hear today - about the "immigrant that got his sentence reduced" - "can you believe it" - "its disgusting".

Yup i flipped eventually, once, maybe twice, a year event for me at work. WTF does the fact that he is an asylum seeker, or immigrant have to do with it, okay so it would have better had it been a local yob would it? - no it ******* wouldn't. But for those supposedly intelligent people it mattered, it was the only point to the story.

I dispair, or im getting old - or both.


Ok you can have your thread back now, sorry
____________________________
9. ..... You may not buy, sell or auction (or host or facilitate the ability to allow others to buy, sell or auction)any Game characters, items, coin or copyrighted material.

#9 Feb 10 2004 at 3:58 PM Rating: Decent
I vote for a Shoot on sight program.

If anyone sees an illegal, you are allowed to shoot them on sight.

Its an economic strain on our once flourishing economy, and a horrendous strain on "legal" taxpayers wallets. Im tired of making lease payments on my freedom, when these illegal scum can waltz in, make as much money as me, and waltz right back out free of charge. If they want to live and thrive in a decent country, then when they hit the border, make your mark and start paying fu*king taxes like the rest of us. Lazy a*sholes.

Oh and im against illegals in schools, unless they are paying taxes, then let them do what they want.
#10 Feb 10 2004 at 4:05 PM Rating: Excellent
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,291 posts
Based on the grammar in that last post, Leapwater, you may be against "school" altogether. Smiley: laugh

I thought the US did have a shoot-on-site policy in place in schools! Hardee har har...ok, kidding aside....

Illegal immigrants are a problem for every developed country, but we "enlightened westerners" cannot deny education to children living in our country, illegal or not. What happens when these kids grow up and still live in the US? They become a different type of burden then. At least if they get an education, they can hopefully contribute to society in the way that matters most: taxes! Yay!
____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#11 Feb 10 2004 at 4:29 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
One of my main complaints about the US is that we spend too much time worrying about the rest of the world yet can hardly take care of our own. I see this immigrant work release program being a total contradiction to the "leave no child behind" policy. We can't edjumicate our own kids, yet unofficially encourage foreigners to come looking for jobs, which usually includes bringing their families, who need to be educated by a system that acknowledges ebonics as an "official" language?

Please.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#12 Feb 10 2004 at 4:34 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
Quote:
Based on the grammar in that last post, Leapwater, you may be against "school" altogether.
Excellent.

And Debalic, don't worry, we'll leva those children behind, too. That law is a total waste of paper (The way to improve schools is by testing them, and letting grant$ be the rewards, but let's not give them any money to prep for these tests, even though state budgets have been slashed and they won't see any increases!) Thanks a lot, GWB. I guess I'll just ship my kids to private school, except you won't help me pay for books, transportation, or uniforms.
#13 Feb 10 2004 at 4:35 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
Based on the grammar in that last post, Leapwater, you may be against "school" altogether.



ha hah hahha hhaha hhhah hah ah hahha hhahhahha hhah....ah ha hah hah..... ha ............ ha........... ah........... ha......................... ahem................ *cough*

I was using the word "illegal" to describe those that have no "legal" citizenship to our country. If you would prefer, I can call them ********* or some other choice descriptive word.

Yeah, it takes a pretty smart guy to pick out gramatical errors in a post, on such a politically correct board. /sigh

Edited, Tue Feb 10 16:44:26 2004 by Leapwater
#14 Feb 10 2004 at 9:43 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Hmmm.... dunno. I think that's an oversimplified question. It's not simply that "immigration" negatively impacts education. Sure it does. But it does so because you're adding more students (and often non-english speaking students) into a system that has some serious problems.

If you just ask the question alone, I think everyone would have to answer "yes". More immigration clearly will have a negative effect on our public school system.


However, if you were to ask the more relevant question of "what is having the most negative effect on our public school system?", then the answer would be very different. Increased immigration is a problem because we have a system that's really not very well designed.

I agree that apathy is part of it, but that's largely a result of the conditions, and not really a cause. Teachers are given little or no real motivation to excel at teaching. Students are not being challenged and tested. The whole system is really designed with it's original purpose in mind (which was to keep kids out of the workplace and off the streets for a good portion of the day). It's not terribly effective at actually educating the majority of the students. It's just a system to plod the kids through and keep them out of trouble until they get old enough to work. If they make something of themselves, then great. If they don't, well...?

Our problem is twofold:


First, we need to stop treating school as just some place to stick kids so they wont cause trouble. We need to take a *realistic* look at what we need in terms of labor in this country, and build our education system around working to ensure that labor is available in the right amounts.

Second. We need to give up the ridiculous assumption that everyone requires a 4 year university degree in order to make a living for themselves. Simple math time. How many jobs available in the US? How many require a degree?

It's not that we don't ultimately fill jobs out about right. We do. The problem is that we look upon the lack of a degree as a "failure". It shouldn't be. If someone wants to train to become a plumber, then by all means, he should be allowed to do that. If we did that, we'd have a much happier population *and* we'd have better plumbers.

We need to adopt a system of testing and grading that's based on some external standard, with a natural feedback mechanism, rather then the artificial "standardized tests" that we have today.

In universities, you see this feedback. A school gains a rep for it's business degree because graduates from that program go on to become successful businessmen. Same with pretty much every other kind of program. Employers know which school have the "best" programs. Employers also adjust their views as the time changes. Money talks. If the quality of graduates from a particular program suck, employers will stop hiring them. This will hurt the college, so they don't want that to happen. End result is that schools work hard to keep their programs at the highest quality that they can. At the very least, they don't want to earn a rep for having a "bad" program.

No such system exists lower on though. We use standardized tests to grade schools, but those are extremely artificial. Schools can teach to the tests, which results in poor students after the fact. However, if schools were instead ranked/graded/whatever based on how well their graduates did at the next level, then that has real value. Moreso, since their success in those higher level programs directly relates to how well they'll likely succeed at their chosen field. By doing something like that, you generate a feedback system that can move through the "university" level and to the high school level. Similar systems can work to a lesser degree at lower levels. You get diminishing returns simply because as you go lower, you're getting kids too early for them to have a clue what they want to do. You don't want your school system to be too narrow at that low a level. General ED is fine at least through the first couple years of high school.


We do need to start splitting our education focus a bit earlier though. Again, the idea is to elminate the percieved requirement of a four year degree (and "failure" if you don't). There is zero reason why a 16 year old couldn't decide to attend trade classes for his last couple years of high school, and then move right into an apprenticeship after graduating. Let's make the tradeshool idea work in this country, rather then being something that people who "failed" to get a degree attend after hours in night school because that's their last choice.


There are lots of skilled professional jobs that do not require the kind of general education that a 4 year university requires, so why on earth do we push only that form of education? That's ludicrous IMO. Let's even things out a bit. Let's broaden education a bit. Let's take the stigma out of working as a tradesman. The guy installing your roof tiles should not be doing that job because he wasn't able to get through a university and settled for roofing for a living. He should be someone who likes the work, and is good at it. Again. You make everyone happier that way, and you improve the quality of your labor pool dramatically.


This doesn't specifically address the issues we see today in middle and high schools. However, I think that if the kids feel that they have a future, and choices they can make instead of the percieved "Graduate and go to college or DIE!" that they're feed from day one, they'll be more likely to see a benefit to themselves from attending (and paying attention during) school. Also, if they're given the ability to adjust their courses towards a particular type of "higher learning", we're not going to toss as many out of the system. Right now, we have a "one size fits all approach". If you don't pass X units in match, and science, and history, and language, you don't get into a university and you are a "failure". Um... If the kid sucks at History, but is great at shop, why the hell can't he do that instead? What if he's really good at art? Or drama? You know, people do make livings doing those things. Why do we only consider a single set of curriculum to be acceptable as a sign that one is capable of being successful? That's madness.


I think if you combine the broadened approach, additional educational options, and the ability for each level to feedback to the previous one, you will change the environment of our school system. The problem really isn't about money. We throw tons of money at schools. It's really about a lack of focus. I think my ideas would put some *effective* focus back in there.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#15 Feb 10 2004 at 10:19 PM Rating: Decent
Gbaji wrote:
Teachers are given little or no real motivation to excel at teaching.


Pardon if I sound sappy, but isn't seeing your students succeed motivation enough? Maybe I only got a taste of teaching since I had only a few students and didn't have them very long, but I sure felt damn proud when my students did well in class, in life, in whatever. Sure I was only teaching things like secondary dominants and tri-tones and such, but still, this can't be too far from what a Math teacher would feel when his/her students memorize pi or some other "cool" math thing.


Quote:
We need to adopt a system of testing and grading that's based on some external standard, with a natural feedback mechanism, rather then the artificial "standardized tests" that we have today.


What you have here looks good on paper, but when I thought about it, it made me think of stories I heard in my German class. Stories of taking a test in your teens that decided whether you were going to go to college, or to a trade school to become a blue-collar worker. Yes, that isn't what you were saying, but you know how we like to take things that were a good idea, and corrupt the original purpose of it, like a bad game of Telephone.

Quote:
Also, if they're given the ability to adjust their courses towards a particular type of "higher learning", we're not going to toss as many out of the system.


Give a teenage boys the ability to adjust their courses to a particual type of "higher learning" would make for a lot of Porno stars looking for work. Seriously, ask Hippo how he would like to change his classes, you know, for his future career goal.
"Um, breakfast break, co-ed swimming, lunch break, drama class (time to ***** around with your buddys) then home!"

Quote:
Right now, we have a "one size fits all approach". If you don't pass X units in match, and science, and history, and language, you don't get into a university and you are a "failure". Um... If the kid sucks at History, but is great at shop, why the hell can't he do that instead?


Well, sadly it's because not every kid that "sucks in history, but is good in shop" even likes shop, or would consider it as a job. 80 percent of kids I knew like that took shop so they could fix up their cars for free. 10 percent of them took it because it was either that or Home Ec.

With your ideas, the same problem of not enough teachers would exist, except now there would be a lack of shop teachers.



#16 Feb 10 2004 at 10:31 PM Rating: Good
MoebiusLord the Flatulent wrote:
Quote:
Edited because of boredom


Come on, join the fray! :)

I am growing tired of the evolution thing. I need new controversy.


If you want it you'll get it:

The problem you imply in the threads title started about the last decade of the 15th century.

And as the American Indians didn't succed in keeping the Europeans of their continent why should you "Americans" now do in keeping "your" country immigration-free?
#17 Feb 10 2004 at 10:49 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
Quote:
Um... If the kid sucks at History, but is great at shop, why the hell can't he do that instead?
Well for one, Bush slashes Voc Ed in his current budget... Of course this doesn't matter because he knows Congress will put it back in, he only does it so his budget will look better.

Quote:
And as the American Indians didn't succed in keeping the Europeans of their continent why should you "Americans" now do in keeping "your" country immigration-free?
Bad analogy. Not truly comparable.
#18 Feb 10 2004 at 11:25 PM Rating: Decent
The Glorious Atomicflea wrote:
Bad analogy. Not truly comparable.
I know I just tried to point out (in a cynical way) that history doesn't care to whom a country belongs on the long run.

Inevitable things happen on or the other way and migration is no phenomen of our century - it's not even an exclusively human one.
#19 Feb 11 2004 at 10:33 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
I getcha, all very Lord of the Flies in the end.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 251 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (251)