DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: kimba1 on January 11, 2008, 03:10:25 PM
-
If anybody notice I tend not to talk about the election .
but my curiosity got the best of me due to the news
what did hillary do last week?
I mean this week all this anti-hillary stuff is popping up.
what did she do to upset people now?
it looks like it happened last week.
I never bother trying to choose a candidate this early in the game myself
I`m a 4th quarter kinda
p.s. if this is a campaign thing
it`s a dangerous one
it got george bush elected and it got bill clinton elected
the not hillary path traditionally means you might as well as swear her in now.
-
what did hillary do last week?
She cried
She won
and now the spotlight is back on her.
same old same old
-
She cried
She won
Yep. After the boo-hoo, she got a little woo-hoo.
-
(http://images.politico.com/global/muskie.jpg)
http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/archive.cfm/year/2007/month/2
Crying works better now than it used to.
Frankly I would not have been upset with Muskie for crying , considering what the nature of the insult was , Andrew Jackson would have shot the insult giver , so crying is not such a biggie.
I didn't mind Dean screaming either , there were things about Dean I didn't like , but I don't see complaining about him giveing up a yell at a pep rally as much of a problem.
These little things seem to make much more diffrence than they ought , is the process capricious this way ?
I really think that problems actually accrue untill one additional small one is too much , so that the last one might be the least one , it still gets the best remembered.
-
You can't get the same reaction to a woman who is thought of as some sort of iron magnolia getting slightly choked up with a six-foot tall man crying ob=ver an insult to his wife.
It wasn't fair to Muskie to do this: the man was totally worn out and hadn't slept for 20 hours, and he was prescribed something with ibogaine in it, and it affected him atypically. Muskie would sure as hell made a better president than Reagan, who was seriously impaired by Altzheimers at that time.
-
Xavier,
What do yo want in a president?
just curious....
Speak to this question honestly,please.
-
now the clintons have pissed off alot of blacks
(http://images.politico.com/global/v2/politico_logo_new5.gif)
Racial tensions roil Democratic race
By: Ben Smith
January 11, 2008
Comments from the Clintons and Clinton supporters are spurring a racial backlash.
A series of comments from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, her husband and her supporters are spurring a racial backlash and adding a divisive edge to the presidential primary as the candidates head south to heavily African-American South Carolina.
The comments, which ranged from the New York senator appearing to diminish the role of Martin Luther King Jr. in the civil rights movement ? an aide later said she misspoke to Bill Clinton dismissing Sen. Barack Obama's image in the media as a "fairy tale" generated outrage on black radio, black blogs and cable television. And now they've drawn the attention of prominent African-American politicians.
A cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements, said Obama spokeswoman Candice Tolliver, who said that Clinton would have to decide whether she owed anyone an apology.
There's a groundswell of reaction to these comments and not just these latest comments but really a pattern, or a series of comments that we've heard for several months, she said. ?olks are beginning to wonder: Is this really an isolated situation, or is there something bigger behind all of this??
Clinton supporters responded to that suggestion with their own outrage.
To say that there is a pattern of racist comments coming out of the Hillary campaign is ridiculous, said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones. All of the world knows the commitment of President Clinton and Sen. Clinton to civil rights issues and not only the commitment in terms of words but in terms of deeds.
Referring to the King quote, Sheila Jackson Lee, another Clinton supporter, said Clinton was trying to contrast King and Obama, not to diminish King: "It really is a question of focusing on the suggestion that you can inspire without deeds what is well-known to the child who studies Dr. King in school is that yes, he spoke, but he also moved people to action."
But other black Clinton supporters found themselves wincing at the Clintons? words, if not questioning their intent.
A Harlem-based consultant to the Clinton campaign, Bill Lynch, called the former president?s comments "mistake" nd said his own phone had been ringing with friends around the country voicing their concern.
"I've been concerned about some of those comments" and that there might be a backlash, he said.
Illinois State Senate President Emil Jones, a prominent Obama supporter, echoed those sentiments.
"It's very unfortunate that the president would make a statement like that," he said of Bill Clinton's criticism of Obama's experience, adding that the African-American community had "saved his presidency" after the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
"They owe the African-American community not the reverse," he said. "Maybe Hillary and Bill should get behind Sen. Barack Obama."
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., through a spokesman, used even stronger language. "Following Barack Obama's victory in Iowa and historic voter turnout in New Hampshire, the cynics unfortunately have stepped up their efforts to decry his uplifting message of hope and fundamental change.
"Regrettably, they have resorted to distasteful and condescending language that appeals to our fears rather than our hopes. I sincerely hope that they'll turn away from such reactionary, disparaging rhetoric."
Many analysts think Clinton won New Hampshire on the back of a feminist backlash against criticism from her rivals and the media, and now, after his own defeat, it's Obama's turn. Race is particularly complicated turf this year, however, in a contest that features two towering figures who pride themselves for breaking racial barriers in American politics.
The first is Bill Clinton, sometimes referred to as the first black president, who now finds himself on the same uncertain ground as any other white politician speaking dismissively of an African-American rival.
He was expected to call in to the Rev. Al Sharpton?s radio show, which airs in South Carolina, Friday afternoon, to explain his "fairy tale" comment.
And the second is Obama, whose 1995 book subtitled "A story of race and inheritance" was hailed as one of the most astute examinations of race in America. He has played the question of race with remarkable dexterity in this campaign, leaving little doubt among African-Americans that he's a member of their community, while delivering a message that excludes no one. To whites, he?s made clear that he's a bearer of racial redemption, not racial grievance, even extending public absolution during a televised debate to a rival, Sen. Joe Biden, for past racially charged remarks. Tolliver said Obama had no personal reaction to Clinton?s remarks and was focused on his own message of hope. But he's spoken in the past of the risk of falling into old narratives of racial division.
I think America is still caught in a little bit of a time warp: The narrative of black politics is still shaped by the '60s and black power, he told Newsweek this summer. That is not, I think, how most black voters are thinking. I don't think that's how most white voters are thinking. I think that people are thinking about how to find a job, how to fill up the gas tank, how to send their kids to college. I find that when I talk about those issues, both blacks and whites respond well.
Now, though, some of those old patterns are reasserting themselves.
The series of comments Clinton critics? cite began in mid-December, when the chairman of Hillary Clinton?s New Hampshire campaign, Bill Shaheen, speculated about whether Obama had ever dealt drugs. In the final days of the New Hampshire campaign, however, the discomfort of some black observers intensified as Bill Clinton dismissed the contrast between Obama?s judgment on the war and Clinton's as a "fairy tale" and spoke dismissively of his short time in the Senate. And the candidate herself, in an interview with Fox News, stressed the role of President Lyndon Johnson, over Martin Luther King Jr., in the civil rights movement.
I would point to the fact that Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done, she said, in response to a question about how her dismissive attitude toward Obama's "false hopes" would have applied to the civil rights movement. That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became real in people's lives because we had a president who said we are going to do it and actually got it accomplished.
An aide later said Clinton didn't intend to diminish King, and later that day she went out of her way to stress his accomplishment and courage in leading a movement.
Then, when Obama lost New Hampshire, the first question on black media outlets like "The Tom Joyner Show" was whether white racism had defeated him, and when a Clinton supporter, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, said though not directly in connection to Obama "that politicians can't shuck and jive in early-primary states, it only added fuel to the fire.
Thursday, a key player in black South Carolina politics, Rep. Jim Clyburn, told The New York Times he?d consider endorsing Obama in response to what he considered a lack of respect in the Clinton campaign's approach to Obama.
?For him to go after Obama, using a "fairy tale," calling him as he did last week, it's an insult. And I will tell you, as an African-American, I find his tone and his words to be very depressing, Donna Brazile, a longtime Clinton ally who is neutral in this race, said on CNN earlier this week.
Asked in an e-mail from Politico about the situation Friday, she responded by sending over links to five cases in which the Clintons and their surrogates talked about Obama, along with a question:
Is Clinton using a race-baiting strategy against Obama?
Brazile later said she wasn't intending to raise the question herself, just to pass on a question that was being asked by others.
The black blogosphere was even less diplomatic, with the widely read site MediaTakeOut calling Clinton?s comment on King "explosive" and the blog Jack and Jill Politics saying it pretty much solidified the image that, whatever happened in the '90s, you are now some out-of-touch rich white folks.
There's a concern about that kind of stuff especially in the black community, said Bill Perkins, a New York state senator who is among Obama's leading supporters in Clinton's home state. The dynamic changed in New Hampshire, and all these little mistakes contribute to the general sense that this isn't a mistake.
Clinton's supporters dismiss the hubbub as the Obama campaign's strategy to woo African-American supporters in South Carolina.
?Some of the Obama people are clearly trying to use Hillary's comments about Martin Luther King and distort them into something she did not say, which is outrageous, said former Pennsylvania Rep. William Gray. It's a hot issue in South Carolina, and they're spreading the word all over. I hope that the good senator will make sure that none of his people are doing that. We don?t need to have a debate about race or gender.
Obama's national spokesman, Bill Burton, wouldn't comment on Gray's assertion.
Voters have to decide for themselves what they think about those comments, he said.
Clinton's campaign also released a statement from a deputy campaign manager, Bob Nash, defending the senator.
The stress of the political season can lead people to say outlandish things, and we assume that this was the case here. With Dr. King's birthday upon us, it's important to keep in mind that his legacy is about the things that bring us together as one people, he said.
But Lynch, the Clinton consultant who is advising Clinton's South Carolina campaign, said he wouldn't advise Clinton to fight on this terrain.
The more you kind of defend it, the worse it gets, said Lynch.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7845.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7845.html)
-
What do yo want in a president?
just curious....
Speak to this question honestly,please.
=================================
Why would I answer dishonestly?
I want an end to the stupid war in Iraq and an expos? of the profiteering that resulted from it, and an end to the oligarchy making foreign policy forever.
I want a government that will work towards more equitable incomes, and less disparity between the mega-rich and everyone else.
I want a government that does not lie, cheat and steal.
I want a fair assessment of what is happening with Medicare and Social Security and a sincere attempt to keep benefits from slipping.
I want my country to stop borrowing from China ( and others) and squandering on military and secretive plotting, dirty tricks and meddling in the affairs of other countries.
I want government funded research in sustainable energy and resource management. Solar, Tidal, Wind, Geothermal, Biomass energy should be amply funded and even susidized until it can compete. Alcohol from corn is silly, and everyone knows this.
I want a stable dollar, not one that constantly spirals down in value against the Euro, Pound and Yen.
I want decent medical care for all Americans, I am f*cking tired of hearing that we can't afford to fund cures for drugs, treatments and diseases while they piss away millions per minute in Iraq. Amei=ricans deserve the benefits of their own taxes.
I want equal treatment for Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is NOT our best ally, it is an annoying embarrassment the way he Israeli lobby steals our money to harass Palestinians, which in turn makes the rest of the world loathe us. We should realize that Israel is no more important than any other country with 4,000,000 people, and does not deserve an annual subsidy of $1,000 per head. I am not for subsidizing any other country in this amount, either.
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum.
I want it to be easier for students from abroad to come to the US and study. We need more scientists, researchers and engineers and the post-9-11 laws are making it too hard for them to come here.
We need to do something to intellectualize the culture, which is being constantly dumbed down by the media.
I would like to see an end to infomercials, telemarketers, billboards and deceptive advertising.
That's a start. A good president could figure out how to get most of this done within the Constitution.
Also, Dick Cheney behind bars if there is any way to convict him, just to show that we aren't going to put up with assholes like him any more.
-
(http://i4.tinypic.com/817ess2.jpg)
-
What do yo want in a president?
just curious....
Speak to this question honestly,please.
=================================
Why would I answer dishonestly?
I want an end to the stupid war in Iraq and an expos? of the profiteering that resulted from it, and an end to the oligarchy making foreign policy forever.
I want a government that will work towards more equitable incomes, and less disparity between the mega-rich and everyone else.
I want a government that does not lie, cheat and steal.
I want a fair assessment of what is happening with Medicare and Social Security and a sincere attempt to keep benefits from slipping.
I want my country to stop borrowing from China ( and others) and squandering on military and secretive plotting, dirty tricks and meddling in the affairs of other countries.
I want government funded research in sustainable energy and resource management. Solar, Tidal, Wind, Geothermal, Biomass energy should be amply funded and even susidized until it can compete. Alcohol from corn is silly, and everyone knows this.
I want a stable dollar, not one that constantly spirals down in value against the Euro, Pound and Yen.
I want decent medical care for all Americans, I am f*cking tired of hearing that we can't afford to fund cures for drugs, treatments and diseases while they piss away millions per minute in Iraq. Amei=ricans deserve the benefits of their own taxes.
I want equal treatment for Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is NOT our best ally, it is an annoying embarrassment the way he Israeli lobby steals our money to harass Palestinians, which in turn makes the rest of the world loathe us. We should realize that Israel is no more important than any other country with 4,000,000 people, and does not deserve an annual subsidy of $1,000 per head. I am not for subsidizing any other country in this amount, either.
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum.
I want it to be easier for students from abroad to come to the US and study. We need more scientists, researchers and engineers and the post-9-11 laws are making it too hard for them to come here.
We need to do something to intellectualize the culture, which is being constantly dumbed down by the media.
I would like to see an end to infomercials, telemarketers, billboards and deceptive advertising.
That's a start. A good president could figure out how to get most of this done within the Constitution.
Also, Dick Cheney behind bars if there is any way to convict him, just to show that we aren't going to put up with assholes like him any more.
Thank you, Xavier.
This is why I admire your posts. You get right to the point, educate, inform (no matter your side of politics) and keep your anger at a minimum...sure...ha! you're the sarcastic prince 'round here....that's true..but not anger/ frothing ranter, imo. (Henny might remind me otherwise).
We all have *anger points* with administrations, that's for sure.
But, I think if we would all start to discuss the issues, issues that you've precisely mentioned here, instead of bitch/pitch to one another,then our nation might start to see some changes in a positive direction. I am not saying your way is the best way...but at least you have hit critical points.
Xavier, I didn't mean to imply that you wouldn't be "honest". I used the wrong word. I meant please be specific and detailed and do not hold back. It was late when I posted that....and I was a bit tired. The question just came from a hip shootin' gal. But, as an educator, I knew you would rally and help me out with answers. Thank you.
I am going to print your post and keep it for reference.... Seriously.... I think critical thoughts, wishes, and ideas need to be saved and explored instead of spit out and back to status quo anger rants. (not you...folks in general)
The one thing that stood out in my mind about your list is that the government would be doing a lot of monitoring?? Am I wrong? What is the difference between a great deal more government involvement, such as you have explained here..... and giving more power, decision making etc...the individual states?
What about the fact that income for "theater people";), and athletes is so very high, and teachers are paid pennies in comparison?
How can government take care of the entire nation?......unfortunately, it's too late to get back all that money Bush has spent on the war.) A war I supported to an extent, but sadly, I have to say that the realization that democracy will stand tall in the middle east in my lifetime probably won't happen. Iran won't let it happen. Iraq will be under fire, as Israel has been for decades. One size doesn't fit all. Hate to call Bush a sucker...but perhaps he is.
-
Then, when Obama lost New Hampshire, the first question on black media outlets like "The Tom Joyner Show" was whether white racism had defeated him, .....
Only if there are a lot of racist Democrats in a New England state.
-
What do yo want in a president?
just curious....
Speak to this question honestly,please.
=================================
Why would I answer dishonestly?
I want an end to the stupid war in Iraq and an expos? of the profiteering that resulted from it, and an end to the oligarchy making foreign policy forever.
I want a government that will work towards more equitable incomes, and less disparity between the mega-rich and everyone else.
I want a government that does not lie, cheat and steal.
I want a fair assessment of what is happening with Medicare and Social Security and a sincere attempt to keep benefits from slipping.
I want my country to stop borrowing from China ( and others) and squandering on military and secretive plotting, dirty tricks and meddling in the affairs of other countries.
I want government funded research in sustainable energy and resource management. Solar, Tidal, Wind, Geothermal, Biomass energy should be amply funded and even susidized until it can compete. Alcohol from corn is silly, and everyone knows this.
I want a stable dollar, not one that constantly spirals down in value against the Euro, Pound and Yen.
I want decent medical care for all Americans, I am f*cking tired of hearing that we can't afford to fund cures for drugs, treatments and diseases while they piss away millions per minute in Iraq. Amei=ricans deserve the benefits of their own taxes.
I want equal treatment for Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is NOT our best ally, it is an annoying embarrassment the way he Israeli lobby steals our money to harass Palestinians, which in turn makes the rest of the world loathe us. We should realize that Israel is no more important than any other country with 4,000,000 people, and does not deserve an annual subsidy of $1,000 per head. I am not for subsidizing any other country in this amount, either.
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum.
I want it to be easier for students from abroad to come to the US and study. We need more scientists, researchers and engineers and the post-9-11 laws are making it too hard for them to come here.
We need to do something to intellectualize the culture, which is being constantly dumbed down by the media.
I would like to see an end to infomercials, telemarketers, billboards and deceptive advertising.
That's a start. A good president could figure out how to get most of this done within the Constitution.
Also, Dick Cheney behind bars if there is any way to convict him, just to show that we aren't going to put up with assholes like him any more.
All I can say is - damn good post!
-
Then, when Obama lost New Hampshire, the first question on black media outlets like "The Tom Joyner Show" was whether white racism had defeated him, .....
Only if there are a lot of racist Democrats in a New England state.
===============================================
No doubt there are some White racists in New Hampshire, but it seems to me that Hillary Clinton, a senator from neighboring New York, and John Edwards, who has had more exposure than Obama simply managed to draw more votes than Obama. Not every vote for a White politician is of necessity a vote against a Black one, nor vice versa.
Obama has less experience than Edwards or Clinton, at least at campaigning, and he is from the Midwest. I think those are the main reasons he did not win. But still, he did get a lot of votes, If he is the Democratic candidate for President, most of those who voted for Hillary and Edwards will vote for Obama, I think.
-
"All I can say is - damn good post"
yeah lets jail political enemies because we think they are "assholes".....how fascist of you to agree JS.
pathetic!
-
Should Cheney go to jail if he did indeed break the law?
-
What about the fact that income for "theater people"Wink, and athletes is so very high, and teachers are paid pennies in comparison?
==========================================================
There is nothing that the government can do about the disparity between entertainers and teachers. Teachers cannot get Beer and soap companies to pay them huge amounts to draw viewers to their ads.
The government COULD tax the entertainers at a high rate and spend the increase on taxes to educators, but tax lawyers always have found a way to dodge high income taxes and always will. It's just something we have to live with.
There are millions more teachers than people who have a knack for pretending to be someone else and playing with balls. We are not respected as they are, even though the worst teacher imparts more knowledge to any of his or her students than the most talented ball player.
The people and culture of the US respects entertaining more than education. This is because of advertising and the consumer economy.
Over half the price of a tube of Colgate toothpaste is advertising, and it sells for $3.99 for 7 oz., whereas the same size tube of my favorite Ultra-brite goes for 99 cents. The main difference is advertising. Many people (even poor people) are willing to pay the extra $3.00 because ads have convinced them of "quality".. We do not teach our students how to recognize or inform themselves about true quality, or even how to invest and be successful capitalists. It is not in any curriculum that I know of.
Most years, I make about 150% more on my investments in mutual funds than I do in teaching. The time required is only about four hours a week, and the education I neede to do this took me about five years of reading, trial and error.
There so so much bad advice out there about investing: always trust in Morningstars stars, keep most of your investments in the USA, bigger funds are best, you pay for what you get (when it comes to load funds vs no load funds and fees and commissions), and always try to avoid taxes. Forbes, Business Week and Money magazine are stuffed with bad and mediocre advice. All that late night infomercial investment advice is just crap designed to get you to pay huge amounts of money for info far inferior to what is available for free from Yahoo finance and Yodlee.
The excellent Mutual Funds magazine was bought out by Money and discontinued. There has been no decent replacement.
-
Should Cheney go to jail if he did indeed break the law?
He lied like a rug. He was blatently incompetent. His incompetence has resulted in the deaths and hideous maimings of thousands of US troops and Iraqis. Of course he should be jailed.
This won't happen, but if I ever get a chance to pee on his grave, I won't miss it.
-
did he break the law?
-
He sure as hell did in my book.
If I could be the decider in his case, he's be in Leavenworth until 2030 or so.
-
What law?
-
What about the fact that income for "theater people"Wink, and athletes is so very high, and teachers are paid pennies in comparison?
==========================================================
There is nothing that the government can do about the disparity between entertainers and teachers. Teachers cannot get Beer and soap companies to pay them huge amounts to draw viewers to their ads.
The government COULD tax the entertainers at a high rate and spend the increase on taxes to educators, but tax lawyers always have found a way to dodge high income taxes and always will. It's just something we have to live with.
There are millions more teachers than people who have a knack for pretending to be someone else and playing with balls. We are not respected as they are, even though the worst teacher imparts more knowledge to any of his or her students than the most talented ball player.
The people and culture of the US respects entertaining more than education. This is because of advertising and the consumer economy.
Over half the price of a tube of Colgate toothpaste is advertising, and it sells for $3.99 for 7 oz., whereas the same size tube of my favorite Ultra-brite goes for 99 cents. The main difference is advertising. Many people (even poor people) are willing to pay the extra $3.00 because ads have convinced them of "quality".. We do not teach our students how to recognize or inform themselves about true quality, or even how to invest and be successful capitalists. It is not in any curriculum that I know of.
Most years, I make about 150% more on my investments in mutual funds than I do in teaching. The time required is only about four hours a week, and the education I neede to do this took me about five years of reading, trial and error.
There so so much bad advice out there about investing: always trust in Morningstars stars, keep most of your investments in the USA, bigger funds are best, you pay for what you get (when it comes to load funds vs no load funds and fees and commissions), and always try to avoid taxes. Forbes, Business Week and Money magazine are stuffed with bad and mediocre advice. All that late night infomercial investment advice is just crap designed to get you to pay huge amounts of money for info far inferior to what is available for free from Yahoo finance and Yodlee.
The excellent Mutual Funds magazine was bought out by Money and discontinued. There has been no decent replacement.
Xavier,
This forum presents me the luxuary of reading what other adults have to "think" about the state of our nation politically and otherwise. I have taught primary school for so many years, that I don't know a hedge from a hog sometimes when it comes to this world. I am not afraid to admit that.....I am still a fabulous educator when it comes to my job.
I "need" this forum, if for nothing else than to learn. I want to know more. I have always been that way. I realize that there have been times when your stance rubs me the wrong way, but by God, man...you know your stuff.
Who the hell needs to watch a political debate via the media when we can watch one right here on the "gate" with more info. I guess you could consider me an intern of sorts in this world....don't ever confuse me with THAT intern, however!!.....
I have always been on the side of the right in the world of politics, as I come by it via familia.
Your knowledge has tweaked my interest otherwise. I am paying attention.
IF, for nothing else, at least you tell it like it is with facts of the liberal persuasion.
Sirs has a knowledge base for such facts, as I am sure others have......I would love to see such details debated in this forum.
It's been a few years since I have darkened these gate doors...in fact my last post was about or during the beinning of the Iraqi war in about '03. I said back then that we could have success if we had support. I was, of course, in full support of the women of the middle east. I was tired of hearing that women were being killed for wearing westernized make-up...or at least having their fingers cut off. I was outraged enough to see Saddam's head come off back then, but I also knew one thing about the middle east. There have been factions of religious sects who are so deeply cemented in the region (centuries old) that the likelihood of a 'win' for democracy was going to be a hard up hill battle. There's more to the story than anyone in the Bush admin. could understand.
Is there a pendulum swing between the likes of Rosie O'Donnell and those of us who wanted freedom in the region of Iraq and Afghanistan? Be damned those people who consider 9-11 an inside job. sorry, but I feel that way.
Toothpaste? Well, hells bells.....all my teeth and I can say about that is....'didn't know that'.
Professor...keep talking..I am listening. I need to know more as an educator. I live with liberals in my world, albeit raised as a republican. I am caught. I am. Thank GOd there is an independent parking place for me.
NOt a sparrow or a turncoat yet, but I am listening and becoming informed from within these gates.
Thank you for your knowledge, XO.
Counterpoint?
-
I "need" this forum, if for nothing else than to learn. I want to know more. I have always been that way. I realize that there have been times when your stance rubs me the wrong way, but by God, man...you know your stuff.
Who the hell needs to watch a political debate via the media when we can watch one right here on the "gate" with more info. I guess you could consider me an intern of sorts in this world....don't ever confuse me with THAT intern, however!!.....
I have always been on the side of the right in the world of politics, as I come by it via familia.
Your knowledge has tweaked my interest otherwise. I am paying attention.
IF, for nothing else, at least you tell it like it is with facts of the liberal persuasion. ....................
Counterpoint?
Although I agree much more often with Sirs than with XO , I must commend your post and your attitude.
Sad tho it is to see you fall prey to the leftist error....
It is wonderfull to see someone express interest in listening and not only expounding.
This may be the best attitude that any of us has ever brought here ....
-
Well, Plane, thanks.
I am listening...didn't say I was voting, quite yet.
XO makes sense, as does Sirs and you and BT.....
I am a teacher. I am also tired of the bullshit that accompanies education.
Funny, because tonight, while I am sure a lot of men were watching the NE game on CBS, I was watching Larry King. Susie Orman(Sp?) was on his program.
She talked a bit about the economic situation in this country coming upon the election time....and yet, she is a gay American woman. She is liberal. Go figure. I had no idea.
So, it was clear why she votes Democrat..."her words">
I am a teacher...and I am tired......So, my heart comes and goes within this arena, Plane.
Having great discussions in this nation of ours is what it's all about.
The skill to listen is what I try to teach my children on a daily basis. Listening for the sake of understanding and decision making.
We MUST listen to all sides of a topic and have time to think.
Mistakes made are part of life....but paying attention, grappling with ideas and making errors in the midst of the learning process is a whole other ballgame.
Sirs and Xavier aren't immune to mistakes or misguided points.
But, knowledge is more than a dangerous thing...it is the only thing. IMO
-
Cynthia,
There really isn't that much diffrence between liberals and conservatives.
I think they both want affordable health care for everyone.
They disagree with how to reach that goal.
Some want to fund it with a tax on vice or the rich.
Other want to fund it more closer to the people via sales tax.
Others say it is the individuals responsibility and the govt might help with tax breaks and savings accounts.
And while none of the solutions are deal breakers, nothing will get done while they argue over credit and control.
-
Cynthia,
There really isn't that much diffrence between liberals and conservatives.
I think they both want affordable health care for everyone.
They disagree with how to reach that goal.
Some want to fund it with a tax on vice or the rich.
Other want to fund it more closer to the people via sales tax.
Others say it is the individuals responsibility and the govt might help with tax breaks and savings accounts.
And while none of the solutions are deal breakers, nothing will get done while they argue over credit and control.
Thank you BT.
I am learning here, as you can tell....no apologies....
But, I will stir up dust with questions from time to time.
My house taxes were raised this year because of a bond that was voted in....to build more high schools in the district.
I was pissed.
Then, how can the money be raised from within the school district as some conservatives are crying for around here.....? I think it's a good point. But, then again, I am working in a classroom without a decent ceiling. Mold is growing and walls are older than I. ha!
I suppose the issue of money is going to be the devil for us all in the long run...but over spending and waste is the bigger culprit.
-
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum
Plane,
It's statements like this one that make me want more.
Xavier knows what my world is all about....just in that statement, alone.
-
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum
Plane,
It's statements like this one that make me want more.
Xavier knows what my world is all about....just in that statement, alone.
All right,...
... but every coin has a tail.
Should it be the government that takes that role in every child's life?
The government is self serving , it is prone to put its own needs into the roots of the education it provides.
The government needs citizens that it can depend on to perpetuate the government .
When this is not a good fit for the kid , the government is not prone to be accommodating to the non standard need.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/pink+floyd/another+brick+in+the+wall+part+ii_20108776.html
I prefer vouchers, which would not necessaryily replacepublic schools , but would certainly produce competition and variety of choice.
Potentially , a competition for teaching talent too.
-
Vouchers basically are a way to get the government to instill a religious belief (such as creationism) in your children, when you are unable to do it yourself, perhaps because of sloth or the inability to explain your beliefs. It is unfortunate that the religious nutballs have taken over the issue of vouchers, because there are many reasons why public schools can fail to teach students to learn and teaching evolution is not any sort of major issue.
The schools that would get the vouchers will not allow teacher unions, will have far lower standards, because they will pay their teachers a whole lot less. I sent my daughter to a Cuban private school from grades one through three so she would learn Spanish better as well as English, and she did, but she also never learned math because the teachers the private school hired did not know enough about match to teach it. Public schools can be very low in quality, because they have to take every kid, even the goof-offs that disrupt the class all the time, who won't be expelled from public schools because they can't be, but will be thrown out of private schools when the parents of the other kids in the class get together and threaten to pull their kids out.
The main thing wrong with education in America is that schools are run by doofi elected to the school board by maybe the 15% of the population that bothers to vote in the elections. Miami-Dade School Board is about par for the course, and is pretty much incompetent at running schools that excel. They tell the teachers that they must sign an "override" to fail more than 6% of their students. If you have too many overrides, you will get canned. If you are a veteran teacher, they will replace you with some beginner at a much lower salary. If they rehire you later, and have fired you for too many overrides, you will have to start over at the bottom of the scale.
Hardly any field is so poorly taught as foreign languages. Europeans with highschool diplomas often speak English as well as or better than native Americans, because in many European countries, clases other than English are actually taught in English. The Germans (especially those in the West) the Dutch, Belgians, Luxemburgers, French and Scandinavians are especially good at teaching English and other foreign languages. Here, they send a Se?orita Garcia in for "cultural enrichment" twice a week in grade school, but then start language classes at the Sophomore level, when all the boys' voices are changing and the girls are getting their first zits. The School Boards do not fund language labs adequately and FL teachers are usually an assortment of first and second generation immigrants who are pretty much clueless about how English grammar really works and therefore cannot compare it with Spanish or French beyond what the textbook says.
So only about one in thirty US students actually attain a decent fluency by taking Spanish I, II and III in HS.
We don't teach English in this country, either. What we teach is how not to misuse English: spelling of difficult words, how to not write run on sentences, how to never use "ain't" (but here it is in the dictionary, teacher), that sort of stuff. Twelve years of it.
If you don't believe me, please give me the rule foir when English uses the present progressive tense vs the simple present tense (I am speaking vs. I speak. Go on, I dare you. Double dog dare you.
The actual grammatical structure of English is best described by something called 'transformational grammar', and is generally only taught in graduate schools as an optional subject. Most PhD's in English can speak the language correctly, but they can't give you many grammatical rules, because these are never taught to them. English is taught as though it were a Romance or Latinate language, which is isn't (Never end a statement or a question with a preposition, for example. Where did that come from? Ooops! From where did that come?
No, wrong again, no one says it that way. Right the first time. English is NOT a Romance language and Latin grammar does not always apply. It's a fusion of a teutonic language (Anglo/Saxon), a Scandinavian language or two (Danish, Norse), Latin, Norman French, and several Celtic languages (Irish, Erse, Welch, Briton). So the grammar is a hodgepodge, with myriad rules and exceptions to damn near all of them.
-
Remarkably, you might be very surprised that we do not seriously agree here. You didn't have a heart attack over that, did you? ;)
XO: I want an end to the stupid war in Iraq and an expos? of the profiteering that resulted from it, and an end to the oligarchy making foreign policy forever.
Prof: I concur that this debacle needs to end, quickly.
XO: I want a government that will work toward more equitable incomes, and less disparity between the mega-rich and everyone else.
Prof: I again concur.
XO: I want a government that does not lie, cheat and steal.
Prof: Totally concur here as well.
XO: I want a fair assessment of what is happening with Medicare and Social Security and a sincere attempt to keep benefits from slipping.
Prof: Concur. One example is that if you lifted the cap, there would be NO money problems here.
XO: I want my country to stop borrowing from China ( and others) and squandering on military and secretive plotting, dirty tricks and meddling in the affairs of other countries.
Prof: I concur and I postulate UP would as well.
XO: I want government funded research in sustainable energy and resource management. Solar, Tidal, Wind, Geothermal, Biomass energy should be amply funded and even subsidized until it can compete. Alcohol from corn is silly, and everyone knows this.
Prof: Totally concur even if tax cuts are needed. Gimme a serious tax break for solar energy and I will pursue this, tomorrow.
XO: I want a stable dollar, not one that constantly spirals down in value against the Euro, Pound and Yen.
Prof: Agreed.
XO: I want decent medical care for all Americans, I am tired of hearing that we can't afford to fund cures for drugs, treatments and diseases while they piss away millions per minute in Iraq. Amei=ricans deserve the benefits of their own taxes.
Prof: Yes, something really needs to be done in this arena.
XO: I want equal treatment for Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is NOT our best ally, it is an annoying embarrassment the way he Israeli lobby steals our money to harass Palestinians, which in turn makes the rest of the world loathe us. We should realize that Israel is no more important than any other country with 4,000,000 people, and does not deserve an annual subsidy of $1,000 per head. I am not for subsidizing any other country in this amount, either.
Prof: Sorry, this one we disagree on.
XO: I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum.
Prof: I concur with the first statement here. We do not promote education well enough. It should begin early and be continuing.
XO: I want it to be easier for students from abroad to come to the US and study. We need more scientists, researchers and engineers and the post-9-11 laws are making it too hard for them to come here.
Prof: Hmm, perhaps. I would say we also need to promote the sciences to US-born more intently than we currently do instead of having to rely on non-native born students.
XO: We need to do something to intellectualize the culture, which is being constantly dumbed down by the media.
Prof: Agree.
XO: That's a start. A good president could figure out how to get most of this done within the Constitution.
Prof: Totally concur; who wouldn't?
XO: Also, Dick Cheney behind bars if there is any way to convict him, just to show that we aren't going to put up with assholes like him any more.
Prof: No, only make him take lessons on how to properly take aim. :) I will admit I have little respect for whatever skills he may possess.
-
(http://i4.tinypic.com/817ess2.jpg)
Well, she won't be able to do much about the Defense budget since that would mean too many jobs being lost, so a "transfer of funds" is probably not going to happen. Expect a tax increase of some sort, however, since the money has to come from SOMEWHERE. No more printing of money, please. (ala AMT).
-
"All I can say is - damn good post"
yeah lets jail political enemies because we think they are "assholes".....how fascist of you to agree JS.
pathetic!
Yet you only mentioned one of his points, CU4. ??? What about the rest? Can you respond without venom?
-
Should Cheney go to jail if he did indeed break the law?
Of course, why should he be exempt, if he is guilty of breaking the law? But, the larger issue is why there should be a need to go into all this "impeachment" discussion once a new Administation is voted in. Perhaps a more congenial Gerald Ford approach might be more approriate for the nation, even if some feel there is a "need" to pursue such an action?
-
I want a government that encourages children to learn, to be intellectually curious and to have questioning minds. More government-funded TV and radio stations could do this at a minimal cost, and DVD's and such could be distributed to those who pay a minimal fee and show promise in learning beyond the curriculum
Plane,
It's statements like this one that make me want more.
Xavier knows what my world is all about....just in that statement, alone.
All right,...
... but every coin has a tail.
Should it be the government that takes that role in every child's life?
The government is self serving , it is prone to put its own needs into the roots of the education it provides.
The government needs citizens that it can depend on to perpetuate the government .
When this is not a good fit for the kid , the government is not prone to be accommodating to the non standard need.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/pink+floyd/another+brick+in+the+wall+part+ii_20108776.html
I prefer vouchers, which would not necessaryily replacepublic schools , but would certainly produce competition and variety of choice.
Potentially , a competition for teaching talent too.
"A True Teaching Talent" actually takes years to develop, imo. I am not saying that a new teacher lacks talent, but there is an "art" to teaching that is not taught at the University level. Good teaching is often times a result of the number of years on the job.
Xavier is right on one point.....private schools do not put up with bad behaviors!
It's so much easier to teach a child if the parents are the stake holders. The parents are more than likely educated and willing to do anything to support the child. They end up paying for their child's education in more ways than one. ok,...Not to say that most public school parents are not involved in every aspect of their child's education. But the private sector affords a great luxuary from the get go. From the administration on down to the janitor.
The private schools here in our city pre-assess incoming candidates, and if the child's tests fall short of the academy's standards, that child is not even accepted into the school. Period.
Who gets the kid....?
The Public Schools.
The public school teacher does h/her damndest to teach on average 27 students in one classroom, students who are at vastly different academic levels, no assistant, no parent support, (a PTO with about 10 members strong), little money to help support the classroom to attain decent materials...etc etc etc.
Does this mean that the teacher should be judeged for lack of "talent"? I think not.
Competition among educators is a horrible idea. My goodness, we pay HUGE BUCKS to actors and athletes for THAT sort of thing....(competition).
I wish there were a beer company who could fund ads for schools.....leave no drunk behind, indeed.
Public school teachers because of the NCLB act, have had to bust their behinds to make sure ALL kids read at grade level by a particular date, and that includes special education students. So, talent be damned! If one child can't read at grade level, and *our* school, albeit our school is one of the last schools to be put on that list, then we are put on probation for three years. We didn't make AYP by ONE KID by the way....no joke!
We must show even MORE GROWTH than the previous year, in order to dig out from the punitive pit. That's crazy!
Ok, OTOH, sure.....
There are some positive elements to the changes in the "Reading First" schools under the umbrella of NCLB.
The schools have adopted more research based curriculum content across the board. ....Math and Reading in particular. Math is a subject closer to my heart. I love the constructivist approach, but it is hard to sell.
But to ask that every student read at the same level by a particular year is crazy....Is it a plan to slowly get rid of the public sector? Why else would the NCLB mandate such highly impossible expectations? Rep. want vouchers. Why? Not just for a chance to teach creationism. Education is being run like a business. Ok...then manage it like one.
Our district is looking at getting rid of bi-lingual education, social studies, and science just to make the AYP(ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS) grade!!!
More children have been left behind than ever. Qualified teachers who are also veteran teachers are leaving right and left. If they do away with such "talented" individuals, as Florida is apparently doing, then shame on them.
As for voucers and rewarding "talent"....
There are too many factors involved in teaching for the so called "healthy competition" idea to fly. It only sets up dissension among the troops....teachers would then be forced to do anything to save their position...and that slippery slope is not conducive to a healthy classroom setting. Teaching to the test!? Yeh, right!
Even Texan teachers have been called on the carpet for that one! IRonically...Bush's Texas.
Teachers assess and assess again, with no time to teach.....we do away with quality programs (art and music slipped away about 10 years ago) but good bye to Bi-Lingual, Social Studies, and now Science. We have had to hide these critical subject areas under the carpet for the sake of "ratings"......scores".....
where's the value?? Where's the quality? Most of us don't bitch about the pay, but hell.....then where's the pay!
It's a bloody shame.
The public has little knowledge of such details of the NCLB, but they're the first to say the school system is falling apart. We are to BLAME.... Frankly, if the next president doesn't do something about the NCLB act to change the many dysfunctional critical conditions therein, I will have to say be aware Q-public, be very aware..... as those children will someday raise OUR OLD AGE VILLAGE.
Extention of the school day is what we need now....we don't have the time to teach it all!
State Mandates:120 minutes of reading
90 minutes of math, 60 minutes of language arts/writing.
2 PE'S a week, a library hour a week, and like XO says....Cultural language fluff that pretends to be Spanish!
Adios to quality.
Criminal.
-
The schools that would get the vouchers will not allow teacher unions, will have far lower standards, because they will pay their teachers a whole lot less. I sent my daughter to a Cuban private school from grades one through three so she would learn Spanish better as well as English, and she did, but she also never learned math because the teachers the private school hired did not know enough about match to teach it. Public schools can be very low in quality, because they have to take every kid, even the goof-offs that disrupt the class all the time, who won't be expelled from public schools because they can't be, but will be thrown out of private schools when the parents of the other kids in the class get together and threaten to pull their kids out.
I will just bet that no one told you you needed to send your Daughter to that priviate school before you thought of the idea yourself.
If the Public school could not depend on students showing up because Parents were exploiting more attractive schools with their vouchers , this would be a motive for public schools to improve their standards and be better competition so that they would get their fair share of the voucher dollar.
This stikes m as a great way to raise standards across the board and give the teaches union some serious clout.
I an even imagine schools in competiton braggin to the public about the quality of teachers they employ, giveing the bonafides and experience and awards records of their teachers in language and math .
What would vouchers ever do to lower any schools quality?
Parents that liked what they have now would simply stay with the default choice untill suficiently appealing came to disturb their inertia.
-
Plane,
I think we need to start charging parents for not raising their children with respect.
So many parents want a free ride. Education begins when they drop their kid off at the door, and ends when the kids walks out the building.
Those parents who are willing to change schools, spend money to attend a private institution (or use a voucher ) are also the same parents who give a damn about their child's education. overall.
Maybe.
There is no grass greener on the other side as a standard solution to the problem.
Families must pull weight.
I would like to see them fined for not reading nightly to their child...how's that for radical? Sarcasm alert.
-
I didn't ask for any damned voucher to send my daughter to the school. She was there from age four on, because my wife and I both worked days, and they had a good daycare when she was younger.
I suppose her Spanish has been more of an asset to her than her math skills. She can do all the basic math, but she needs a calculator: she can't do it in her head.
It seemed more logical to me to buy a house we could afford in a very convenient location, even though the local public schools were said to suck, because best public schools were in areas where the house payments were more than double and you had to drive 10 minutes to buy anything. To me, a house is a place to live: for investments, I prefer mutual funds, which do not require commissions and ideal circumstances to sell.
Here's what I see happening if they give out vouchers all over the place: the public schools already have to pay the same amount for maintainance, and utilities, so their expenditure per student will drop. The private schools that get the vouchers will be in improvised facilities (all the charter schools in Miami-Dade County were in places really not adequate for a school), and the teachers will be paid only about 2/3rds of what public schoolteachers make. This means that there will be any more moonlighting teachers, because the public schoolteachers have trouble paying the rent already.
Voucher schools will do what usually happens when you have strong bosses and powerless employees: high teacher turnover, most of the voucher money going to administrators. and an even punier share going to the teachers.
-
"Voucher schools will do what usually happens when you have strong bosses and powerless employees: high teacher turnover, most of the voucher money going to administrators. and an even punier share going to the teachers."
And teachers make DIBELY squat (DIBELS an inside teacher yoke)...as it is.
Strong bosses?...how about Peter Principals? That's what we have. Beaten down, manipulated teachers, and if you are a strong teacher you are usually in the back pocket of the administration anyway.
-
I agree that teachers do not make much money, HOWEVER, to be frank, what they make is determined by SUPPLY AND DEMAND, namely there are enoguh people, primarily women, that will work that job for that pay. If there weren't, the pay would be higher.
-
"That Job"...is also Your Job, Prof. as it is XO's job in a sense. It's all about Education.
MOst of us teach, instruct, facilitate because we love children.
I grew up in a generation where the job opportunities were.... a "stewardess"..(the glamour job of the time) nurse, or teacher...if you weren't going to be a mother! I was a musician in college. I switched from Music teaching to Early Childhood Ed. Loved it. Taught kinder for years....Piaget was my man! ha!
I had choices. But they were few. This is true. If I could do it all over again, I would make wiser choices...but within the education field. I would love to learn more, read more, and be able to be when I grow up....a History teacher in a High School or University, but it's too late for me.
Women still do not get the respect they deserve in general no matter what job they hold.
For certain, there are not enough people who want to teach these days- male or female!
Interestingly, I don't think it's all about money, alone.
It's about the talk of the town and the media. The spread of "disrespect for teachers" has trumped the low pay.
I've reaped the benefits of a significant raise this year. Perhaps that is the good news from the NCLB act.
Depending on the STate, teachers now have a better opportunity to make more money in the job --at all levels, but they must first write a comprehensive Dossier + have so many years of experience, get a MA degree and teach at least 7 years in order to make 30 grand a year.
Perhaps NCLB is behind all of that in a way. Good for it!
It's difficult to teach 24 students with the system as it is. Perhaps things will change when the dysfunction of NCLB has gone to rehab.
Who wants to teach?
I did, and I do, still.
I have lived without many luxuaries in NM. I have not complained.
When are we going to hear about the fabulous teachers who are out there now? There are a hell of a lot of them.
Rafe Esquith the author of __Teach Like Your Hair's on Fire: The Methods and Madness Inside Room 56__
is one of those teachers.
-
"That Job"...is also Your Job, Prof. as it is XO's job in a sense. It's all about Education.
MOst of us teach, instruct, facilitate because we love children.
I grew up in a generation where the job opportunities were.... a "stewardess"..(the glamour job of the time) nurse, or teacher...if you weren't going to be a mother! I was a musician in college. I switched from Music teaching to Early Childhood Ed. Loved it. Taught kinder for years....Piaget was my man! ha!
I had choices. But they were few. This is true. If I could do it all over again, I would make wiser choices...but within the education field. I would love to learn more, read more, and be able to be when I grow up....a History teacher in a High School or University, but it's too late for me.
Women still do not get the respect they deserve in general no matter what job they hold.
For certain, there are not enough people who want to teach these days- male or female!
Interestingly, I don't think it's all about money, alone.
It's about the talk of the town and the media. The spread of "disrespect for teachers" has trumped the low pay.
I've reaped the benefits of a significant raise this year. Perhaps that is the good news from the NCLB act.
Depending on the STate, teachers now have a better opportunity to make more money in the job --at all levels, but they must first write a comprehensive Dossier + have so many years of experience, get a MA degree and teach at least 7 years in order to make 30 grand a year.
Perhaps NCLB is behind all of that in a way. Good for it!
It's difficult to teach 24 students with the system as it is. Perhaps things will change when the dysfunction of NCLB has gone to rehab.
Who wants to teach?
I did, and I do, still.
I have lived without many luxuaries in NM. I have not complained.
When are we going to hear about the fabulous teachers who are out there now? There are a hell of a lot of them.
Rafe Esquith the author of __Teach Like Your Hair's on Fire: The Methods and Madness Inside Room 56__
is one of those teachers.
Well, I admire teachers, for many of the reasons you mention. However, regardless of that, it still is accurate that you and I are paid what we are due to the Law of Supply and Demand and this generally applies acorss the board unless you have organizations such as strong unions in-between.
A way the teachers here in Georgia get higher salaries is by going back to school. They are paid more for a Master's, a ED.D, ED.S, or Ph.D. Have you pursued this route? Wouldn't the school system pay you to do this like they do here in Ga?
-
Yes, I have a Master's Degree in E.C.Ed. 32 years of experience teaching, and an ESL endorsement.
I live in New Mexico. We're a poor State, pure and simple. We rank very low in many areas when it comes to education.
I don't mean to really complain that much. It may sound like I NEED more MONEY, but what I do "need" is to see that education is put on a higher pedestal overall. Yes, you are at a higher level than I, Professor. Your pay should be more substantial. True.
Thanks for your concern, though.
Cindy
-
"Competition among educators is a horrible idea."
How could you get this so backwards?
There should be competition , over you!
The monopoly benefits the monopoly holder and this isn't you right now , there is only one employer for teachers that can hire more than a few.
The public schools should have to offer you mor than you are worth to their competetors.Elese you go where you are more appreaciated.
The absense of competrition causes a lot of the probles we presently see with education.
-
Yes, I have a Master's Degree in E.C.Ed. 32 years of experience teaching, and an ESL endorsement.
I live in New Mexico. We're a poor State, pure and simple. We rank very low in many areas when it comes to education.
I don't mean to really complain that much. It may sound like I NEED more MONEY, but what I do "need" is to see that education is put on a higher pedestal overall. Yes, you are at a higher level than I, Professor. Your pay should be more substantial. True.
Thanks for your concern, though.
Cindy
Pay at my public insititution is determined, upon entry, by several factors such as the market when you enter, yuor degrees and publications, you field and how well you interview. After that, it is all the typical state employee raises.
Your field matters a lot. We pay beginning Assistant Professors, tenure-track, around $35K in the Social Sciences and Humanities and $50-60K in Business or IT. It is because of supply and demand. Ph.Ds in History and English, are, quite frankly, a dime a dozen. If you get promoted to Associate Professor, as I am now, you get a whopping $1000 raise! lol
-
Your field matters a lot.
My field, Early Childhood Education, matters so much that people really don't realize how much.
A graduate professor of mine back in the late 80's, told us that if this society doesn't take notice of how we approach the issue of Day Care, our children will not only suffer....so will we all. At the time, working mothers were the "sign of the times" and businesses were offering QUALITY Day Care for working moms here and there.....
But, have we paid attention to such issues? I am not in the business world, and I can't answer that as a working mother, but we must teach and provide so much to our young children..no matter the generation, political situation, etc.
I would love to be part of a study on this question.
The Day Care teacher is paid minimum wage, and has little or no E.C.Education.
Babysitting is NOT proper DAY CARE. Day Care as it is in many facilities still does not meet quality standards.
It takes a lot of money to educate our society. We need it now, more than ever.
-
I totally comcur, but how might this be accompished? A culture-wide phenomenon might have to happen, eh?
Except is has got to be about more than just money...
-
but the real question is has education ever really got respect to begin with?
look at our expressions brain,nerd
can you honestly think those names are used in a positive light?
an interest in science fiction tends to make a person to be interested in science and math.
but would parents support this or steer them in sports?
bill gates is the riches man on earth and never once I hear he`s dating material.
theirs alot of cultural baggage for a kid to be studious,unless they`re into sports.
-
HOWEVER, to be frank, what they make is determined by SUPPLY AND DEMAND, namely there are enough people, primarily women, that will work that job for that pay. If there weren't, the pay would be higher.
==================================================================
What would happen is the teachers might get paid more, but they would have 50 or 60 teachers in every class.
American society does not value knowledge for its own sake, or critical thinking, or independent, creative thought. It is what every society needs, but when these traits occur, it is most often DESPITE the society.
Competition is useful in some aspects, but by and large, it only creates small elites of privileged characters and general incompetence of everyone else.
One example is how we teach PE. The coach picks the biggest and strongest kids, which are a tiny minority, and 90% of the school's resources are dedicated to developing superior basketball, football, and baseball (and occasionally track and gfield ) players. The skinny kid, the fat kid, the kid with poor hand-eye coordination only gets to do jumping jacks and push-ups and rope climbing as the Coach and the physically talented kids mock them.
The goal of a good educational program does involve developing useful skills in as much of the population as is possible. Identifying one or two star athletes or spelling chganmpions is perhaps good for the winners, but it ignores everyone else.
Giving bonuses and raises only to the few teachers whose students score highest on multiple choice exams will likely cause so much resentment among the unrewarded members of the faculty that this will not be made up for by the improvement in the few classes they teach vis a vis all the other classes they do not teach.
The former way to reward good teachers is to make them administrators and double their salaries, and that is even worse.
The main reason why US schools are so poor compared with those of other countries is that they are run by school boards composed of local yokels, as opposed to people who have professional training in education, by which I mean not just methodology but in subject material as well.
School board elections generally fail to have more than 20% voter participation, and a lot of morons and people with agendas are elected. The Miami-Dade County School Board has a clown named Demetrio Perez on it. He has no degrees, but he owns a number of private schools. He votes against improvements in the areas where his schools are, and votes against such things as improved security, because he knows that every knifing, every fight in a public school will cause increased enrollment in the schools he owns. Generally, he accuses those who run against him of being "communists", which seems to get out a small and predictable number of Cubans to vote for him.
-
Hmmm, being a homeschooling parent, I have a basic distrust of public schools. You should hear the horror stories of osme homeschoolers I know because they didn't follow the party line in this regard. My daughter scored a 1370 on her SAT yet the local school board tried to MAKE ME give her an entire class in African American studies. I said it was already part of her curriculum but they wanted MORE coverage. I said NYET and had to get the Home School Legal Defense Dund attorneys involved (see www.hslda.org). The local school board quickly backed off. Then they tried to tell the number of hours day she was supposed to study; I told 'em it was not an issue of quantity but quality and so it varied, depnding upon what needed to get doen that day. THey didn't like that either. Well, too bad. ONE more call and they backed off again. BTW, my HOMESCHOOLED daughter scored a 1370 on her SAT.
I would like control of local schools to be by ELECTED local citizens via school boards or some other mechanism just as I would want more control to be transferred from the Federal sector to the local one in many areas. You wouldn't believe the number of educated baffoons I see every day from the Education Division. No real clue as to what to do other than what they were taught in textbooks. Plus, their secular humanism viewpoint is yet another reason I distrust them.
-
Education in this country is truly sick.
People like XO, all good teachers, can only perform from their sphere, and all other energy is spent battling with the front office on issues that largely lie in the folder marked "PI Political Correctness." I speak here only of public education, middle and high school level.
It has become that no subject of discussion can really be permitted because it will fall to somebody as inappropriate. Somebody, however tangential.
Since inappropriate can mean anything (Nixon used the words "inappropriate" and "appropriate" as a major coping mechanism (( . . .deal with that at the appropriate time . . .))) then anything defines the parameters--anything. So, in anticipated defense, nothing.
There is not a bot of discussion in schools these days, folks.
There is only adherrance to a dignified silence, born of fear of speaking outside the newly laid parameters. Christians, true to their obsessions, organize parents by the group to have all kids report all references to a multitude of presented agendas in a school, their phones always on the ready.
As a consequence, with no power to teach, they are putting in their time.
Ask any principal. Get him/her drunk first--they are so used to lying, spinning, pretending to be real, you have to get them snockered to get them honest.
-
so far the thing I notice here about school education is a need to cut education from poor performing students.
teachers don`t want to teach them and parent don`t want thier kids near them.
It seems the answer is to dump these highly unlikely to learn kids and not bother even trying
am I wrong ?
I notice age was not mentioned ,does this mean from kindergarten it can be known a kid to not able to learn?
I get this message due to the fact nobody mention about teaching the difficult to learn kids.
but a preference not to teach them at all.
-
Education in this country is truly sick.
People like XO, all good teachers, can only perform from their sphere, and all other energy is spent battling with the front office on issues that largely lie in the folder marked "PI Political Correctness." I speak here only of public education, middle and high school level.
It has become that no subject of discussion can really be permitted because it will fall to somebody as inappropriate. Somebody, however tangential.
Since inappropriate can mean anything (Nixon used the words "inappropriate" and "appropriate" as a major coping mechanism (( . . .deal with that at the appropriate time . . .))) then anything defines the parameters--anything. So, in anticipated defense, nothing.
There is not a bot of discussion in schools these days, folks.
There is only adherrance to a dignified silence, born of fear of speaking outside the newly laid parameters. Christians, true to their obsessions, organize parents by the group to have all kids report all references to a multitude of presented agendas in a school, their phones always on the ready.
As a consequence, with no power to teach, they are putting in their time.
Ask any principal. Get him/her drunk first--they are so used to lying, spinning, pretending to be real, you have to get them snockered to get them honest.
So,
Crane, what then is YOUR solution?
-
I totally comcur, but how might this be accompished? A culture-wide phenomenon might have to happen, eh?
Except is has got to be about more than just money...
Yes, a paradigm shift, of sorts, has to occur, Professor.
That's what my "Integration of Curriculum" professor really meant.
Our nation has to rethink how we take care to raise the "young child".
Doesn't mean that:
(a) all mothers MUST stay home and take care of their children full time
(b) Companies, and businesses MUST find the resources to educate those children under 4
(c) all public schools are bad apples and all private schools are green apples-there is a happy median certainly so
There is no one quick trick pony for all of this.
There has to a way to solve the problem, but sadly no one has understood the issue enough to care. My discussion with Dr. Laughlin was back in 1986! Nothin' has changed since....I remember thinking perhpas there was a light at the endof the tunnel in terms of awareness. Women were really starting to hit the work force in full force back then, and children were being placed in day care centers in record numbers.
Sure we provide for the women of this country, but we really don't provide the quality for the quiet ones....the little ones.
Women have every right to be president, if they want....they also have every right to be a mother at home (single or married)
It doesn't take a village to raise a child. It takes competent, caring educated parents to raise a child. (a Perfect world)
I firmly believe that is just as important to be raised by mommie, if not more so that to take the BABy Einstein IQ test...;)
What's wrong with staying at home during the formative years, interacting with a neighborhood of kids, participating in organized events provided by organized, loving parents? Ex: playing ball, reading, producing mini plays in a neighborhood garage, art classes by artist moms, taffy pulls at once house.
It takes thoughtful parents, and wise moms to organize a QUALITY raising, as we had as young children.
Who has that now?
Some...Perhaps some, like yourself, prof....folks who homeschool their children.....not always an easy thing to do for most. Many hoops to jump through, issues of socialization, competent parents who are willing to learn how to teach a child. Not as easy as it sounds.....Not to mention that religious values are a huge reason for homeschooling these days.
It takes focus on what is important.
Just a NOTE:
I bitched the other night about the "theater people".....frankly, it was a pleasing experience to watch the Golden Globes sans the glitz and hype. Sit home, theater people....receive your "grade", and move on to ACT. It's our job.
I am becoming a bit of a leftist...sorry to say, when it comes to some issues. This nation is far to selfish, and hungry for an audience.
That audience starts out by following the "idol" adoringly until that idol decides she/he has had enough....thus killing self or falling on the stage of fire, ready to burn at the expense of the greed for glitz. Not right. (my leftish rant)
Anyway, we must shift our focus towards children, lest we find ourselves in a state of no return both economically and socially.
-
HOWEVER, to be frank, what they make is determined by SUPPLY AND DEMAND, namely there are enough people, primarily women, that will work that job for that pay. If there weren't, the pay would be higher.
==================================================================
What would happen is the teachers might get paid more, but they would have 50 or 60 teachers in every class.
American society does not value knowledge for its own sake, or critical thinking, or independent, creative thought. It is what every society needs, but when these traits occur, it is most often DESPITE the society.
Competition is useful in some aspects, but by and large, it only creates small elites of privileged characters and general incompetence of everyone else.
One example is how we teach PE. The coach picks the biggest and strongest kids, which are a tiny minority, and 90% of the school's resources are dedicated to developing superior basketball, football, and baseball (and occasionally track and gfield ) players. The skinny kid, the fat kid, the kid with poor hand-eye coordination only gets to do jumping jacks and push-ups and rope climbing as the Coach and the physically talented kids mock them.
The goal of a good educational program does involve developing useful skills in as much of the population as is possible. Identifying one or two star athletes or spelling chganmpions is perhaps good for the winners, but it ignores everyone else.
Giving bonuses and raises only to the few teachers whose students score highest on multiple choice exams will likely cause so much resentment among the unrewarded members of the faculty that this will not be made up for by the improvement in the few classes they teach vis a vis all the other classes they do not teach.
The former way to reward good teachers is to make them administrators and double their salaries, and that is even worse.
The main reason why US schools are so poor compared with those of other countries is that they are run by school boards composed of local yokels, as opposed to people who have professional training in education, by which I mean not just methodology but in subject material as well.
School board elections generally fail to have more than 20% voter participation, and a lot of morons and people with agendas are elected. The Miami-Dade County School Board has a clown named Demetrio Perez on it. He has no degrees, but he owns a number of private schools. He votes against improvements in the areas where his schools are, and votes against such things as improved security, because he knows that every knifing, every fight in a public school will cause increased enrollment in the schools he owns. Generally, he accuses those who run against him of being "communists", which seems to get out a small and predictable number of Cubans to vote for him.
American society does not value knowledge for its own sake, or critical thinking, or independent, creative thought. It is what every society needs, but when these traits occur, it is most often DESPITE the society.
Right!
Competition is useful in some aspects, but by and large, it only creates small elites of privileged characters and general incompetence of everyone else.
Right!
Giving bonuses and raises only to the few teachers whose students score highest on multiple choice exams will likely cause so much resentment among the unrewarded members of the faculty that this will not be made up for by the improvement in the few classes they teach vis a vis all the other classes they do not teach.
Oh my dear God, Right!
The main reason why US schools are so poor compared with those of other countries is that they are run by school boards composed of local yokels, as opposed to people who have professional training in education, by which I mean not just methodology but in subject material as well.
In France, the school curriculum maintains the same material, and expectations year to year...decade to decade. Parents are not surprised about what is required of the child, children know exactly what to expect and get right to work, and the end result is not a swing of new ideas, crappy rhetoric, or patchy excuses for poor quality. It just is. Stable, consistent, and solid.
Here in the USofA we reinvent the wheel depending on who has been ELECTED....on all levels.
I repeat....it is not the damn teachers who are at fault, nor is it the system necessarily. You give me the chance to teach...I'll do it. I do it every day...and folks like Yellow, who know nothing about the issue will continue to rant and post editorials.
Depth of the problem far outweighs the height of the solution. As a nation, sometimes I feel as though we are adolescents in scope. Europe has been there...done that ....and we have a lot to learn. We keep trying to please, and yet we are as mad as hell and not gunna take it any more, mentality. Americans are afraid to work. Americans don't want to take on the responsibility of a failure. Sorry, but god, I am sounding more left than I had realized. ha! But, I am a free thinker, and I don't like what I see.
It's not always about who is running the school board, although that is a major factor, XO...good point. It is also about the public outrage in the other direction...in the direction of quality in terms of the Q public taking on some responsibility. WE must stop passing teh buck and making excuses for poverty of minds.
No wonder we fail.
We have to refuse to
-
it is not the damn teachers who are at fault, nor is it the system necessarily.
nonsense.
teachers and the system lost control of the classroom and the students within a long time ago.
getting that back would go along ways towards solving the problem.
Step 1.
set up a separate school for kids with discipline problems.
-
but the real question is has education ever really got respect to begin with?
look at our expressions brain,nerd
can you honestly think those names are used in a positive light?
an interest in science fiction tends to make a person to be interested in science and math.
but would parents support this or steer them in sports?
bill gates is the riches man on earth and never once I hear he`s dating material.
theirs alot of cultural baggage for a kid to be studious,unless they`re into sports.
Well, Kimmie....ambivalence is part of human nature.
A nerd to one is a hot commodity to another, ;)
Seriously, I see what you are saying. In general, those attitudes are prevalent in High School teenagers.....(cough) sometimes..... I still think that our nation is adolescent in nature. We tend to glorify those who are
a)rich
b)sexy
c) rich and sexy
d) HEROS.....in sports: (
-
it is not the damn teachers who are at fault, nor is it the system necessarily.
nonsense.
teachers and the system lost control of the classroom and the students within a long time ago.
getting that back would go along ways towards solving the problem.
Step 1.
set up a separate school for kids with discipline problems.
Uh....no. not realistic, BT
-
why not?
-
"teachers and the system lost control of the classroom and the students within a long time ago."
That's an insult, BT.
-
"set up a separate school for kids with discipline problems."
why not?
Ok...why don't you explain HOW.
Start there, please.
How can we 'SET UP' a separate school for kids with D problems?
-
Build a building, or convert an existing one.
Staff it
Populate it with those who disrupt class.
Objections?
-
We do that here in Houston County. It seems to help.
-
Objections are in the direction that you seem to want to shovel the "d" problems into and under one roof.
tame the masses......those who don't tow the line.
Oh...that's an idea.
BT, one way or the Highway attitude?
My objection is that you are not an educator, but an arm chair idealist.
Discipline problems can be altered and controlled through change in more than one way.....and helping families who have few or no resources to support the child, is one way to attack the problem.
I guess I hate to hear someone blatantly come up with a way to solve a problem that involves a brick, or cemented four wall location.
-
They have schools for kids with learning and discipline problems in Miami-Dade County, but it hasn;t made any major difference that I can see.
Of course, I teach in a private university, and my daughter graduated in 1990.
-
Perhaps the idealists can teach at the D school and let the pragmatists teach the other 35 kids in a class who want to learn.
Since when did the one or two in a class who have behavior problems take precedence over those who want to learn?
-
They have schools for kids with learning and discipline problems in Miami-Dade County, but it hasn;t made any major difference that I can see.
Of course, I teach in a private university, and my daughter graduated in 1990.
I am frankly happy to say that we in NM are not up to the "par" of many States in the Union.ha!
But, children are going to always have problems...even the gifted.
Differences in learning styles, cognition, and social interaction ..no matter...children all deserve attention.
-
Perhaps the idealists can teach at the D school and let the pragmatists teach the other 35 kids in a class who want to learn.
Since when did the one or two in a class who have behavior problems take precedence over those who want to learn?
Are you saying that those kids who have problems don't want to learn?
I get the feeling that you are reprimanding and finding fault with those kids, BT.
They do have the potential to learn.
I have one in my class...and he is helpless because of his home environment. He comes to my class and he is inspired to learn. He loves school. I would hate to hear that anyone would put him into an institution of sorts....because he is a child of gang members......which he is. Damn, you've hit a nerve with me, Bill. But you are good at that...and frankly, I thank you for that.
Your 3DHS is here to stay for the very reason...that is your guidance..but it's hard to respond with such topics when challenged by you sometimes....it brings a teacher to a critical mass moment.
There's so much more to say about education.....why? It depends of the individual, always. ..always.....
Children are always to be given the benefit of the doubt that raised them.
-
If he loves mainstream school then he will modify his behavior to avoid d school.
And if he doesn't maybe a visit to d school will help him appreciate what he is missing.
And if d school doesn't work out there is always juvi school.
-
I think it's better to try to help kids and families, before punishing them by sending them to D- or Juvi schools.
That was my point. I don't think that we as a society care to try that venue as often as PUT THEM AWAY.....where they will stay and learn a lesson. not necessarily, BT
-
I think it's better to try to help kids and families, before punishing them by sending them to D- or Juvi schools.
That was my point. I don't think that we as a society care to try that venue as often as PUT THEM AWAY.....where they will stay and learn a lesson. not necessarily, BT
Perhaps that is the problem. Schools are not designed to be social services agencies. They are designed to educate the citizens of the future.
I am not saying you shouldn't take a personal interest in a troubled student. Good on you if you do. What i am saying is when their behavior affects the other students in a class and takes away from their learning opportunities, then something else needs to be done.
We don't think twice about removing cancerous tumors from a body so that the disease doesn't spread.
Why should troublesome students be any different?
Setup a branch office of child services at D school, if need be.
-
We don't think twice about removing cancerous tumors from a body so that the disease doesn't spread.
Why should troublesome students be any different?
Possibly because a troublesome student is nothing at all like a "cancerous tumor."
-
Possibly because a troublesome student is nothing at all like a "cancerous tumor."
Why not? Are they not a tax on teachers time? Do they not distract from the mission? Do they not eat up valuable resources disproportionate to their numbers?
It's funny. We don't think twice about removing drunk drivers from the highway. And when we do so, we don't care what kind of childhood they had. We remove them from the highway because they are a danger to others.
I suggest that those who interfere with the primary goal of schools which is to educate our children, are a danger too society, just as much as a drunk driver is to those on the highway.
-
Possibly because a troublesome student is nothing at all like a "cancerous tumor."
Why not? Are they not a tax on teachers time? Do they not distract from the mission? Do they not eat up valuable resources disproportionate to their numbers?
It's funny. We don't think twice about removing drunk drivers from the highway. And when we do so, we don't care what kind of childhood they had. We remove them from the highway because they are a danger to others.
I suggest that those who interfere with the primary goal of schools which is to educate our children, are a danger too society, just as much as a drunk driver is to those on the highway.
Drunk drivers are removed for being an immediate danger to the safety of others. Not for "interfering with the primary goal" of other drivers or the transportation system of a government. Once again the parallel you are illustrating is not even close to identical.
Children are people, human beings, not statistical units of production measured against resources to rate effectiveness of output and production. You're starting to sound like the Nationalist Government of South Africa.
-
i think the problem is in the past too many of these truely bad students who should really be dead or in prison actually do too well.
I think the solution is too not allow these people jobs with any authority.
a d or juvi school is pretty much mean a point of no return.
-
I am not suggesting that children are not people. I am not suggesting that children with disruptive behavior should be abandoned. I am suggesting a d school might be better equipped to rescue these children than aurora mainstream middle school might be.
I am not suggesting that additional resources can not be brought to bear at these schools. I am not suggesting that councellors, nutritionists, medical and oter personnel can not be made available.
I am suggesting that a resource be made available so that these kids can be rescued.
Now why are you against that opportunity for redemption?
-
in san francisco
we have a school which pretty much a juvi school .
and it just like the place you`r thinking about.
but for these kids to get there they have to be kicked out of every school in the city.
so with that in mind funding cannot ever be great for that building.
it just unrealistic in government to ever properly fund a place that expect thier student to fail.
I`m not against redemption but i do notice patterns that such desires to help kids get a education is lacking.
p.s. it`s not exactly true private schools refuse troublesome kids
if a parent donate enough money the child tends to behaive in the eyes of the faculty.
for some reason alot of my co-worker used to work in private schools and seen this happen ALOT
-
Perhaps the idealists can teach at the D school and let the pragmatists teach the other 35 kids in a class who want to learn.
Since when did the one or two in a class who have behavior problems take precedence over those who want to learn?
=========================================================================================
I hardly think that idealists are any more likely than pragmatists to want to teach disruptive students.
No one wants to teach a kid that refuses to pay attention and tries to distract the rest of the class.
What is needed is a teacher (idealist, pragmatist, vegetarian, whatever) that knows how to make this particular kid want to learn.
There are probably some kids of the extreme autistic sort that can't be taught much of anything at all. I suspect that they are in the minority, a very small minority.
Teaching geniuses (Harvard, MIT, CalTech, Berkeley) is easy. They want to learn and many will be ahead of most their teachers in research and general knowledge in the fields that interest them.
The hard jobs are teaching the non-geniuses and the students who have no intellectual curiosity at all, and they are in the millions.
The professors with the easy jobs get the big bucks. The rest of us have harder jobs, but we are paid perhaps one-fifth the salary.
\
-
The purpose of the d school is to focus on those students with behavior problems and not a warehouse for special needs students that may have medical conditions that complicate the matter.
-
The purpose of the d school is to focus on those students with behavior problems and not a warehouse for special needs students that may have medical conditions that complicate the matter.
===================================================================
So you are saying that austitic students need to be separated from students who are goof-offs or nascent psychopaths?
I don't think this is as simple as it sounds.
-
they key word is focus
this maybe done at the beginning but in 5 years little by little it`ll turn into a building to dump kids in.
the focus to actually educate will fade abit.
only the parents of these kids will complain and since thier poor it`ll not have the same impact as a homeowner.
-
Possibly because a troublesome student is nothing at all like a "cancerous tumor."
Why not? Are they not a tax on teachers time? Do they not distract from the mission? Do they not eat up valuable resources disproportionate to their numbers?
It's funny. We don't think twice about removing drunk drivers from the highway. And when we do so, we don't care what kind of childhood they had. We remove them from the highway because they are a danger to others.
I suggest that those who interfere with the primary goal of schools which is to educate our children, are a danger too society, just as much as a drunk driver is to those on the highway.
Drunk drivers are removed for being an immediate danger to the safety of others. Not for "interfering with the primary goal" of other drivers or the transportation system of a government. Once again the parallel you are illustrating is not even close to identical.
Children are people, human beings, not statistical units of production measured against resources to rate effectiveness of output and production. You're starting to sound like the Nationalist Government of South Africa.
However, I am not sure I like the idea od a parent of a "B" student having to put up with the teacher not having enough time to devote to my child to assist thme to perhaps be an "A studnet becuause that teacher is spending so much of his/her time with the behavior child. If I were hte parent of that behavir child, then I mightl ike it. But, I am not sure the other parents appreciate it.
Cynthia, be honest, how much more could get done, ACADEMICALLY, during a school year if teacher didn't have to spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with discipline issues from a subset of the class?
-
However, I am not sure I like the idea od a parent of a "B" student having to put up with the teacher not having enough time to devote to my child to assist thme to perhaps be an "A studnet becuause that teacher is spending so much of his/her time with the behavior child. If I were hte parent of that behavir child, then I mightl ike it. But, I am not sure the other parents appreciate it.
Cynthia, be honest, how much more could get done, ACADEMICALLY, during a school year if teacher didn't have to spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with discipline issues from a subset of the class?
The better question to ask initially is: do teachers spend an inordinate amount of time with one or two troublemaking students? My son attends public schools and I have not heard of this particular problem. Many of my good friends at church are parents as well and I hear few such indications. In fact, I know one mother who homeschools her child and it has nothing to do with the "sinister evils" of public education, but that her daughter is dyslexic and the public schools (the same one my son attends in fact) has not done a good job working with her dyslexia.
I realize that public education varies widely by region, but this simply has not been a problem that I've heard much about in my neck of the woods.
-
The better question to ask initially is: do teachers spend an inordinate amount of time with one or two troublemaking students?
If disruptive students is not a valid issue, then what is the problem with raising the achievement levels of students in a given class.
What are the obstacles towards achieving this goal.
-
I think you'll find the answer, as with many answers in sociology is - it depends. It depends on many factors.
Raising achievement standards with school children isn't the same as increasing the output at a widget factory.
Plus, children today are learning more at a younger age than we did in school. I've learned that from the homework my son does. There are obvious imperfections in public schooling, but it is a higher level of learning that what we had, I'm willing to bet.
-
I don't think we are talking about production quantities.
We are talking about quality control.
I don't see why that would be a problem.
Are you saying certain segments of society are incapable of applying themselves?
-
I don't recall saying that, no.
What I am saying is that just like adults, there are a wide variety of factors that affect a life of a student.
Some have learning disabilities, some have mental health problems, some have issues at home, some grow up priveleged, while others grow up in dire poverty, some deal with bigotry, while others never understand what that is (or are the ones who dish it out). There are a myriad of factors that go far beyond simply applying oneself or not.
-
So setting standards is folly?
We should educate to the lowest common denominator and call it a day?
That is not what i wanted for my son, and it certainly is not what i want for my grandson.
-
So setting standards is folly?
We should educate to the lowest common denominator and call it a day?
That is not what i wanted for my son, and it certainly is not what i want for my grandson.
Setting standards depends upon the standards. As someone who has worked in performance budgeting I can certainly say without hesitation that it can very easily be a double-edged sword. In education, I think there are basic standards to be met, but by design those would not be the goals I (nor you) would be content with for your children or grandchildren. Basic standards are what they are. I don't think flooding schools with standardized tests accomplishes anything.
I think education needs to be specialized and we need to do a better job of it. But, looking at it from a perspective of a private business is a poor route to take.
-
Who says anything about setting education to business standards.
Why are shouldn't basic standards be raised? What makes you think your child can handle the challenge and other peoples children can't? Why not raise the bar?
-
actually the bar used to be higher
kids can handle it but parents(not liberals) will complain and will knock it down.
schools never made these decisions to dumb down
-
I think it's better to try to help kids and families, before punishing them by sending them to D- or Juvi schools.
That was my point. I don't think that we as a society care to try that venue as often as PUT THEM AWAY.....where they will stay and learn a lesson. not necessarily, BT
Perhaps that is the problem. Schools are not designed to be social services agencies. They are designed to educate the citizens of the future.
I am not saying you shouldn't take a personal interest in a troubled student. Good on you if you do. What i am saying is when their behavior affects the other students in a class and takes away from their learning opportunities, then something else needs to be done.
We don't think twice about removing cancerous tumors from a body so that the disease doesn't spread.
Why should troublesome students be any different?
Setup a branch office of child services at D school, if need be.
Well, BT, it's like asking a doctor to heal only those who have the most potential for healing and thus life....a long life....as opposed to caring for a person longterm, let's say....or healing someone who ends up only taxing the Dr.'s time, and possible reputation.
We care about individuals in this world....albeit not a perfect one, and we must attempt to reach every mind--not just the mind that has an exemplary ability to listen, learn, and focus.
I'll admit, my job would be a hell of a lot easier if I could only teach those kids who want* to learn, those who have little, few or no social behavioral problems, but that's in a Walgreen's world...
By the by.....I want to say that I was a bit put off by your statement last night, and believe that I over reacted. You weren't insulting teachers. That's not your style. Having strong opinions is your style and I had forgotten that. I welcome the chance to debate, discuss argue with you, and I guess the old Cynthia from years ago came out...out of a ting of anxt.
Anyway....I think that the institutions set out to "help" those troubled children are a dime a dozen and if it becomes that easy to get a kid into one....we would be referring kids right and left if they pee on a wall, or slam their fists into another's face. (happened in my class last year)
I have taught children of parents who are full blown gang member, but to see the potential in those chidren's faces, and their hearts each time they walk into the classroom....it would break your own heart, BT if we did what you recommend here.
It is difficult to teach a child from such brokeness but if we had more funding for that sort of class within the system, for example....A dedicated BD teacher with an assistant in a class of 5-8 Behavior Disorder kids, has potential for something...and something is better than throwing the baby out with the bath water.
If done right, I believe the child has more opportunities in the PS system than in the D home etc.....
Each day for a BD type kid is just that DAY TO DAY. IF a problemed child has 4 pretty good days out of 7 because the teacher has put a system in place to enhance learning...that's a win!
If the student started out with 0 good days and by trimester's end reached 4/7 consistently good, solid capable self motivating days, there's something to be said for that.
The other students in a classroom who are "normal" socially, aren't as negatively affected as we might think, in the long run.
Most children actually learn from watching an adult set up boundaries, circumstances for learning, show a sense of caring even though no one else would.....a socialization isn't alway about "getting along"...IT's witnessing life in its reality.
Those "difficult ones' provide negative models, but who's to say that the rest of the kids don't gain something from that experience. Children are resilient little buggers....and they learn in spite of many of us, sometimes, too.
YOu can't say that school is only about academia. Children are social beings, with tears, fears, joys and runny noses....all of them.
Teachers, citizens, you, me, we all should take care to look out for, nurture, support, care for a weaker person in need.....children or the homeless, or the elderly or the sick etc......but we don't.
Most people don't care. Let the gov. take care of that problem.
Depending on the severity of the social problems is also part of this problem and the equation doesn't add up to one size fits all.....so to blanketly say that we should send those kids to another place and space in time where they should sit and rethink their bad deeds....is a crock.
It's a tough job to educate. It's a tougher job to do nothing at all for others, imo.
-
Cynthia, be honest, how much more could get done, ACADEMICALLY, during a school year if teacher didn't have to spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with discipline issues from a subset of the class?
Oh thanks for the question, Prof.
Actually, I think I answered this one in my post to BT. Hope my answer is clear. I am a bit tired this evening. We have had a lot of changes in our school this week, as we are moving into a new classroom that was just remodeled after 25 years+. Tax payer's dollars of course! But, at least I don't have to teach with 1950's window blinds, mold on ceilings, ...etc...I am so excited and so are the students. We pack every recess and we move in next week. The children are still learning the constructivist math, core reading strategies, and six+1 traits writing each day- no backin' off of curriculum! ha!
We all want perfection, and ease in our world, sure....but that's not always what is reality. XO said it best. He always does;)
I still maintain he's the professor's professor.....Thanks Xavier for your ability to speak for most educators...so far anyway.
By the way, I had an autistic child in my class two years ago. Was I to ignore him...or send him away, BT? No. The paper work to get him into special ed took almost the whole year. I learned a lot about perseveration, OCD, aspergers and autism...not to mention how to teach a child in such a world. Priceless! I loved it.
XO:
What is needed is a teacher (idealist, pragmatist, vegetarian, whatever) that knows how to make this particular kid want to learn.
-
Who says anything about setting education to business standards.
Why are shouldn't basic standards be raised? What makes you think your child can handle the challenge and other peoples children can't? Why not raise the bar?
The problem Bt is that you seem to be saying that setting a high standard magically makes it happen. It does not.
- Every child should learn Calculus before leaving their Junior year of High School -
Now what makes that happen? Will it happen? What happens if it does not? Do teachers start getting penalized?
You could simply remove the kids who cannot pass the high bar and then that will artificially inflate your achievement scores (and some countries do this). Yet, what have you really accomplished?
And again, you are distorting my argument. I never said "other children can't handle the challenge." I said there are always extenuating circumstances. I'll give you an example. Picture a child of a single mother who is dying of AIDs and lives in rundown tenement housing that hasn't seen any improvements in thirty years (budget cuts don't you know). This child has a hierarchy of needs, of which learning might be very important, but so is taking care of his mother and likely worrying about what will happen to him when she dies. He might have to purchase all the groceries, pay all the bills, do a great deal of things that a normal ten year old would never have responsibility over. Homework may not be first on his mind when he gets home - it might be that mom is vomiting blood again.
So, certainly this child can rise to challenges, but it may not be the ones you put towards him.
-
So the exception should become the norm?
-
Where I teach, we have students from the US, but also a lot of students from the Caribbean: the Bahamas, US. Virgin Islands, Trinidad, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Jamaica, etc.
It is pretty safe to say that students who graduated from High School in any of the Caribbean Islands score on average 20-25% higher in my classes than those from the US, despite the fact that most Caribbean students have never taken Spanish before, and most of the US students have. Spanish is required in Trinidad, and the Trinidadians are usually my best students.
The US Virgin Islands and most of the rest offer scholarships based on academic performance: those who don't qualify don;t get any money and they don;t come to my university, or leave home at all.
-
actually says something about education from abroad.
we tend to think it`s superior everywhere else.
but if you really think about it
not quite true
there is next to no chance for a son of a shoemaker in london of ever getting a high level job.
remember the very reason so many overseas student come here to learn
they just can`t get that education back home.
education wise we have the most available
if you look into those kids with higher test scores overseas
how many of those are from poor income families
pretty much everyone here can go to college and take any course
the only thing holding us back is money and sleep
I don`t anyone who works fulltime and goes to college whose fully awake.
some folks can giveup sleep at a drop of a hat
but most can`t
-
actually says something about education from abroad.
we tend to think it`s superior everywhere else.
but if you really think about it
not quite true
there is next to no chance for a son of a shoemaker in london of ever getting a high level job.
remember the very reason so many overseas student come here to learn
they just can`t get that education back home.
education wise we have the most available
if you look into those kids with higher test scores overseas
how many of those are from poor income families
pretty much everyone here can go to college and take any course
the only thing holding us back is money and sleep
I don`t anyone who works fulltime and goes to college whose fully awake.
some folks can giveup sleep at a drop of a hat
but most can`t
There was a movement here a couple of years ago to try out a new scheule for all students in teh PS.
The High School students would begin classes later in the morning, instead of 7 a.m. and the elementary students would begin classes earlier. Reason being; adolescents need more sleep (apparently, studies have shown).
The problem with the idea was the fact that many parents did not want to have to get up early in order to get their child to school in the primary schools. The High School students had after school sports practice, etc, so the idea just did not fly.
As it stands now, the High School kids are dismissed earlier in teh afternoon, and unless they have sports or music events, they are roaming the neighborhoods.
-
The mediocrity that used to be typical of US high schools has reached the college level. Most students at community colleges and other colleges that have anything resembling open enrollment (you can get in with a HS diploma), need to take remedial reading and match classes. There is a major problem with grade inflation in most colleges and universities, where most students get A's and B's in most classes.
US education is still better than education in Latin America, but rather far behind most of Europe, as well as Japan, Taiwan, and the 'Asian Tigers'.
-
yeah but in europe and asia most don`t have access to that education.
here you have a better chance
the lead researcher to crack the genetic code never went to a ivy league school he did the trade school route .
I`m not saying anybody can do what he did,but the educational opportunity is much higher here in the U.S. than anywhere else.
true the quality is lacking compared to those oversea
but that not say much since most people there will never get that education anyway
I don`t recall people ever saying europe is a land of scholars
the education is high ,but that don`t seem to trickle down to the people
have you notice they can`t even use our method of measurement(which is way more complicated) and somehow they expect us to know 2 systems
-
The mediocrity that used to be typical of US high schools has reached the college level. Most students at community colleges and other colleges that have anything resembling open enrollment (you can get in with a HS diploma), need to take remedial reading and match classes. There is a major problem with grade inflation in most colleges and universities, where most students get A's and B's in most classes.
US education is still better than education in Latin America, but rather far behind most of Europe, as well as Japan, Taiwan, and the 'Asian Tigers'.
At the collegiate level, there are basically two levels of thought on tihs issue. One says htat if you need remeidal classes, then why are you in college, you need to puruse the trade school route. The other states that everyone deserves "a shot" and if remedial will help along this process, then why not? I work at an open enrollment institution and a large proportion of our classes are remedial. Students msut take thme nad pass with a certain grade (they get no academci credit for the class) vefore thye cna proceed to credit classes.