I agree that there is a lot of knee-jerk criticism, but not all the criticisms are knee-jerk criticisms, and not all the remedies suggested by critics are impossible to implement. In some cases at least "impossible" translates to "is contrary to a socio-political objective that sounds good on paper and REALLY good in sound bites."

I agree technology has helped a little. Computerized grading can save the time of averaging scores. I'm not entirely sure about the objectivity of it. The reporting may be objective, but the grades from which the reporting is derived is collected from teachers grading individual papers. Time consuming and very subjective in most cases. OTOH, subjective does not mean bad. Also, the computer generated report card gives me feedback like "Your child usually meets or exceed the POS blah blah blah." This is okay, but it's what I would expect from straight As and Bs. That is, I don't see that this is giving me any more information.

Some other things I think are handy are phones in the classroom and email. I communicate with my kids' teachers all the time (going to do it today as a matter of fact).

Also, the technology OF teaching has improved - teachers seem better organized (usually), there's actually days dedicated to planning, and in the early grades, they send home these folders (which I find more useful than the computerized grading). Plus, they give the kids planning books and teach them strategies for homework. Also, they have classes for parents. Unfortunately, these classes seem largely populated by parents who don't need them. (More on this later.)

Technology is great, but it can only augment and not replace the relationship between a good teacher and room full of attentive students.

We agree about the SOLs. OTOH, what I have witnessed from many teachers and principles with regard to SOLs is an attempt through the use of not too subtle language to undermine the tests in the minds of parents - even to incite parents and students. (This is of course not to imply that the SOLs should be criticized.)

Communication with parents is one of the great successes of our education system so far as I can see. Well, sort of. Teachers are pretty good at sending home "information," but all to often they're sending home a bunch of crap which I have to wade through to find useful stuff. Sometimes this "crap" they send home is really condescending advice to parents. It used to annoy me, but then I realized there are parents who really need some kind of help. This will be a lot better when all communication is done electronically so we don't get swamped by paper. OTOH, I went to an "open house" at my older daughter's middle school and stopped by to talk to each teacher. I came to her home ec teacher and asked how she was doing. The teacher said she was doing fine and then began discussing how the class was a bit noisy at times. This sounded a little weird as unlike the younger kid, my older one is a real wallflower. So I asked "So Amy is blabbing a lot in class?" "Oh, NO! I didn't mean to say that. It's just that it IS a boistrous class. Mr. Green, the problem with these function is that the parents who really NEED to come, don't."

While, the schools are doing, imo, a pretty good job (with excellent improvement) with communicating to us parents, we parents in general are not availing ourselves of the opportunity. The problem here is CRYSTAL clear. People talk about the desire for an "education" for their children the same way they talk about the desire for a million bucks. That is, they want it, if it doesn't require them to do any work. "Yes, I too would like to be thin in 10 minutes a day and I too would like to make 30 to 50,000 dollars in my spare time." With a few exceptions, the parents I see complaining the most aren't the ones who are actively involved with their kids' schooling.

Now, reference to kids you cannot force to work - see here is a critical difference between how you view things and how I view things. If I were in a class where there were kids I could not force to work, it wouldn't have a big impact on my decision to stay. I would take steps to fix that, but I wouldn't let it prevent me from reaching the kids I COULD reach. There would come a point I would recite to myself, "Experience is a dear teacher, but fools will learn at no other." OTOH, not working and disrupting are two different things.

One of the most profoundly stupid things about modern teaching is the reluctance that many teachers have to get rid of disruptive kids. I don't blame this entirely on teachers. I saw a set of rules one time - an enumeration of steps that a teacher must take - it's staggering, really. And you can't just DO it, you have to document each and every step, as if one doesn't any other function. First, I've witnessed this myself. I've gone into classrooms and witnessed students being abusive to teachers who refused to do anything. Second, the biggest regular complaint I get from both of my kids is that there are often so many people in the classes who are talking that they can't hear the teacher or do their work or even think. (My youngest's teacher has really greatly improved in this. He's only been teaching a few years. Back when my oldest had him, he let the students walk all over him - about which fact she continually lamented.)

As for incompetent teachers, I can only say that I have attended at least 9 schools in my K-12 years. My parents put this number at 14. (They say I went to 8 schools in 2nd grade, but I only remember 3 of them. This partly explains why I took it twice.) I've been to a number of schools. I'd say most of the teachers were okay, some few were dazzlingly brilliant, and in every single school I encountered people of submarginal competence.

I met a few marginal ones in my kids' elementary school, but none I would say is outright incompetent. At the middle school, however, I've encountered one who was outright incompetent (he was also a bald-faced liar and a general imbecile). He's amazingly popular with some kids. (Most kids and many teachers and teachers don't distinguish between popularity and quality.)
What do they care if what they're learning is wrong? There are other cases, too - teachers who give the kids busy work and then go out in the hall and talk to other teachers during the class. (No kidding - my daughter was so irritated with this she began taking notes on when the teacher left the room and came back. She begged me not to go to the principal about it, which I didn't, but wanted me to know what was going on.)

I don't judge people as incompetent because they don't know certain things - even core things in their field. I don't judge people as incompetent because my kids don't like them or even because I don't like them. I don't judge any starting teacher as incompetent and I don't judge any teacher who's pushing into a new subject area as incompetent. It takes a bit of effort to convince me that someone really doesn't know what he's doing or doesn't care enough to do it well.

k