| Sagarin |
| ||
|
I pledge the allegiance to the government of the USA and the Republic for which it no longer stands, two or even three nations, under the Wizard of Oz, utterly divisible, with liberty without consequences, entitlements, and guaranteed equality for all. It all started when we stopped keeping score in youth soccer games so we could have a "feel-good" culture and implemented a "no child let ahead" mentality. I see it in our school every day. |
| are you jerry sandusky? |
| ||
Maybe you should stop hanging around the school every day then, creep. |
| The Animal Within |
| ||
|
WW2, no video games, kids and women "knew their place" and teachers could beat kids for being bad. Yup the glory days! |
| Yarbles |
| ||
People always say this, but I can't recall a single soccer game that wasn't scored going back to kindergarten. I'm 23, so I would have been in the heyday of this supposed scoreless era. |
| HeebyJeeby |
| ||
|
The politicians want the schools to fail. The politicians know how much money there is in education, and they can't wait to get their hands on it. That's how vouchers work. Say each school gets $7,300 per student. The typical public school will spend $7,300 on each student. If you start a charter school, you will have a CEO instead of a principal. Then the school can spend $1,800 on each kid while the CEO keeps the rest and spends it on his condo in Barbados, his second home in Palm Beach, and his contribution to the Super PAC for the politicians who make the laws that favor his lifestyle. In return, we get a stupid, defeated populace, incapable of critical thought--just perfect for developing into obedient workers for other CEOs. Kids: They're a renewable resource! |
| the schools make the CEOs |
| ||
So where do the CEOs come from if the schools are producing a stupid, defeated populace? |
| Sagarin |
| ||
Umm, we're required to volunteer 40 hours per week, but we usually do more. You should try investing in your kids instead of accepting that teachers are doing their jobs. However, I will admit that there's always two or three jerk-off kids that take the teacher's attention from everyone else. But I've also seen the difference between an excellent teacher and a poor one, despite the equity of pay. It's not just the teachers and it's not just the parents. But there's a hell of a lot of bureaucratic constipation in the system and a fundamental lack of a moral compass anymore in the name of political correctness. |
| just curious. |
| ||
Who is "we" and for what reason are you required to volunteer 40 hours per week at the school? |
| exaggeration |
| ||
40 hours a week must be tough on parents with a full-time job. |
| Sagarin |
| ||
|
It's a charter school. Works well. Teacher's don't make as much, but it's a more flexible schedule and curriculum. I like it because my kids are disciplined, uniformed, taught to compete, and easily a grade ahead of their local school peers. I work part-time from home now as my physical limitations permit, and my wife has a flexible schedule. To be frank, a lot of families have all kinds of justifications for needing two incomes when one will suffice, just as Flagpole always says. We all had to make sacrifices at one point. I was lucky enough to grow up in a decent neighborhood, though my stay-at-home mom had to sew the letters "OP" on my shorts, because we couldn't afford nice things, while my wife grew up in a neighborhood with bars on the windows and nightly violence. My kids are very fortunate, and they're going to do a lot of mission work. Gratitude and charity is a part of their daily M.O. as well. But for all the bitching and moaning on this board about this and that, socioeconomic stratification will ALWAYS exist. POVERTY, no matter how hard you attempt to address it, will always exist. Mobility will exist too with the proper value system and a work ethic. And, at the end of the day, if you have your HEALTH, the world is your oyster and you haven't a damn thing to gripe about. If you have your health and aren't surrounded by people telling you how bad you have it and how you're owed something, which is what our culture has become, you can overcome any obstacle. |
| Former drug addict |
| ||
As a teacher, who is living and teaching in a heavily Hispanic community, I can tell you that you are just straight up wrong. No culture in our country accepts having kids before you are 18-20. The problem is that too often, the kids who get pregnant have parents who are junkies or something along those lines or parents who are just extremely poor. More support ? Are you kidding ? The US govt spends too much in education and healthcare it just goes to the wrong places. More "support" wont help drug addicts. Try your tired liberal line of bs with someone else. This leads to kids who are not well guided and more likely to do thing like get pregnant at 15. You want to fix teen pregnancy? Provide more support and better jobs for the poor of this country. Also, I would almost guarantee that this is more of a class issue than a race issue. Yes, whites have lower teen pregnancy rates, but that is probably only because whites also have a much lower rate of child poverty.[/quote] |
| HeebyJeeby |
| ||
Gee, I dunno! Where did geniuses like Donald Trump and George W. Bush get educated? |
| the schools make the CEOs |
| ||
Neither of those people have ever been CEOs. Anyway, you missed the point completely. You're saying that the schools only produce people who are incapable of being anything other than "obedient workers for CEOs." That's a big of a paradox, isn't it? If we aren't producing people who are fit to be anything more than obedient workers for CEOs, then we aren't producing CEOs, right? |
| the schools make the CEOs |
| ||
Ok, I guess that's not true. I thought they were Presidents of their respective companies. The rest of my point remains, though. |
| Fictional Facts |
| ||
Research consistently shows, time and again, that charter schools do not perform better than public schools, despite the fact that charter schools can reject kids with disabilities or low performance as well as expel kids who do not behave. Locally controlled public schools, often considered the cornerstone of American democracy in the United States, must educate everyone. However, parents are usually satisfied and very pleased with themselves when schools pass out bumper stickers that say things like, "My kid excels at Thomas More Charter School." Hey, all the kids at our school are easily above average! Clearly Lake Wobegon abounds. It is very easy to lead parents into a state of denial. When you "compete" you must have losers. Schools are better when children are expected to learn and not compete. Children are not small adults. They will have the rest of their lives to compete and get their heads kicked in by cunning, ruthless, obsequious people--after they learn to read, write, locate Canada on a map and to appreciate beauty for itself, wisdom for itself, freedom for itself, and justice for itself. When you have children competing you must dutifully sweep the losers under the rug so no one sees that things are not as they appear. . . . because appearances are everything. Charter schools also turn out people who spell teachers (plural) with apostrophes. |
| HeebyJeeby |
| ||
Wrong. You're saying that. YOU missed MY point. My point is that politicians are deliberately subverting education because of greed. |
| Azaleas |
| ||
|
^Yes. I've had a couple of friends who worked at charter schools who were literally not paid for months on end until they finally quit 3/4 through the school year. Of course, they were also not education majors and clearly had no idea how to teach. Maybe teachers need a guild like doctors and lawyers have? Sagarin, I am blown away by the 40 hr/week volunteer requirement. That doesn't make any sense to me. Are people volunteering 5-1 every day? Or are you lying? |
| shrink |
| ||
|
As has already been said, the problem is 300 pound people covered in tattoos. They are ruining our society |
| math prof dude |
| ||
|
Here are several things that have changed since the 1950's. 1) If you were female and in the top 10% of your class you probably became a teacher. What other choice did you have? Talented females had a difficult time going to med school, law school, etc. It was also socially acceptable to pay females a sub-standard wage, since they were not going to raise a family. 2) The schools primary function was to deliver the top 5% for the professions (think calculus), and to provide a minimum education (think shop math or consumer math) for the rest. Educating everyone was not a public problem. The school's primary function was to sort out students. 3)The educator made the decisions, and the parents went along with the decision. 4) Curriculum was controlled by educators within the system. States had academic departments. This was phased out beginning in the 1980's with privatization. This era has been characterized by "can't trust the educator" and also "divert lots of public funds to politician's friends." |
| math prof dude |
| ||
|
By the way, innovators of the space program and computer revolution were educated in our public schools in the 1950's and 1960's. |