We finally sat down and I helped her write a specifically worded email (finally got a good use out of all of that HR training as a manager! ha) to trigger the right response from her admin.
Any shitty single kid can ruin a classroom for the rest of their peers. And the system doesn't allow for any consequences. It's massively disappointing.
I have now dealt with dozens of public school teachers and while some were good, most were ambivalent and there were more garbage teachers than good ones.
The refrain of It's Not The Teachers rings hollow. It is the teachers. It may also be the administration, the parents, the community, the politicians, everybody, but it is still the teachers.
Also, people here should stop generalizing their experience in California to the country at large. MA and NJ have pretty good public schools, some of which are in dense and diverse regions of each state.
What everyone is talking around is the fact that the solution to "problem children" in the classroom, if you're removing them, is that you have to spend more money and more time working with them to get them off the "problem" track and re-integrated.
Because that's the stakes: that kid who disrupts the classroom, if you don't succeed, is your future welfare dependency, local crime problem, or incarceration cost and a huge amount of lost tax revenue.
Separation helps the problem kids as well. I have personally observed a high success rate in turning around kids once they get the more focused attention possible in a small class.
To be concrete, if you had 2 teachers and 60 kids with 5 of them "problematic", the most effective approach would be to divide them so you had the 55 cooperative learners in one room and the others in their own class.
Hence, nothing effective is allowed.
It's the same concept by which Google Maps will invariably tell you, "you are in the fastest path to for destination", even if you just took the dumbest wrong turn possible.