Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

I find it ironic that the White House is now trying to make States pay for the “No Child Left Behind” Program. It is very funny to watch Republican Governors whine about it.

As for Free-Market Schooling, what percentage of the population would be unable to afford this? The fiction that vouchers pay for this is crap. The truth is the other students are paying the cost for these free-loaders. The best Teachers and Computers are not cheap. The Students who pay full tuition get them. Outsiders with vouchers are just leeches sucking at other people’s wealth.

So what percentage of the population do you want vouchered?

Aldous
If you are from Clinton-Schummerville back east, then your crap statement may be true. I the State of Arizona, we have more charter schools than the rest of the states. Vouchers are about to be made available. Your statement that outsiders with vouchers are leeches sucking at other people’s wealth should more aptly be applied to public education where money flows free from the taxpayers for additional programs to fix the programs that didn’t work. Why is it that far too many kids graduating from high school cannot do basic math? Basic math is not a difficult subject. In education there are no free loaders on the matter of curriculum. I should confess that I have little knowledge of what the vast mojority of the states do in financing education other that it always comes from the taxpayer. I have been involved in my local school board. I am working hard to change perspective on education. It must start at home. Parents must be involved in the education of their children. I’ll have more later on teacher’s unions, prep/voced, funding of schools, and more.

Education is another one of those “hot bed” issues. The fact is, the “leeches sucking at other people’s wealth” are the myriad of social programs invented by the Democratic Party as a payoff for support at the polls. How many decades of democratic control & spending does it take to get something right? The mantra of the left is education & SS. They have robbed every penny of SS money to pay for education as well as other programs & it’s still not fixed.

The reason there is such a cry as never heard before from the left about vouchers & public schools is the thought of loosing the ability to be the sole perverter of young minds. Nothing is going right for the left. They are loosing power & can you imagine the thought of parents being able to choose a school for their own children. The very thought of a parent having that right (to choose), haven’t they read Hillary’s book “It Takes a Village” to raise a child. The next thing you know, parents will want to have the right to teach their children about “GOD”.

This cry is nothing new. In the 70”s Christian schools were springing up all over the country. There were organized efforts by the left & the NEA to shut them down. Churches had to hire law firms to represent the Christian schools on the state levels. The cry from the left was, they are robbing tax dollars from the schools. The public education system is “DOOMED”. Yet they are still around. Can you imagine the cry on the left when they realized these children would be taught about “GOD”.

No company or business in the US could stay in business if they operated as the public school system does.
It’s just a thought.

Perplexed

If we’re being honest here, the only reason vouchers is seen as a right vs. left issue is because the teacher’s unions are composed of public employees (whose own bottom lines make them naturally gravitate toward the party most sympathetic to greater public spending) and because so many cultural conservatives want to isolate their children from the “liberal” indoctrination and low standards they percieve to be part of the public schools.

Both are not only selfish but short-sighted.

So it’s extremely ironic that so many charter schools are actually inner city schools that serve disadvantaged minorities, and so many private schools in conservative-dominated areas actually test and perform lower than their public school counterparts.

Like so much in our nation, I think this is a problem with assuming a one-size fits all approach to a given issue.

People in Georgia who think they should have the right to dictate policy for the people of New York, and people in New York who think they have the right to dictate policy to people of Georgia.

It’s madness, and people on both sides of the political spectrum are to blame.

How many politicians in DC & for that matter, how many SC justices send their children or grandchildren to public schools? Anyone have a number on that?

Perplexed

Matt,
The same arguments about consumers and education could be applied to consumers and the military, police departments, fire departments, and so on.

Ah, but educating a child is a little different than purchasing mustard, isn’t it? Because if you don’t like the mustard, you can always throw it away. And if someone can’t afford mustard, well…

But that’s not where you’re going. You want consumer-driven choices of schools, but you still want the state involved, making sure children are provided an equal opportunity, right?

Whatever happened to ‘thinking outside the box.’ Apparently we’re down to ‘thinking outside the triangle.’

And if you look back at the sides of the triangle, fear & apathy are essentially identical. Under “apathy” you write”

“Make no mistake, change can be frightening, but the mere thought of change has paralyzed too many education policy makers that they simply don’t care.”

Terrified into paralysis by the mere thought of change? Beyond fear lies apathy?

Introducing this as a topic of discussion is great, but in my opinion, I’m sorry to say your analogies using mustard, ice cream, and an iron triangle fail to persuade me. What, exactly, are the pros and cons of introducing competition into public education?

The problem with vouchers is it that it uses public money to pay private business to help fix a problem with public schools. Why not simply improve the public school system and cut out the middleman?

Vouchers are a diversion, meant to allow partisans and sectarians to educate their children to suit their sensibilities at public expense, rather than force them to publically educate their children in a common class with other children.

As for whether this is an abandonment of Public schools, I guess it all comes down to whether you think money can be in two places at once. I don’t think that’s the case. If you’re going to improve the public school system, don’t go spending it to line the coffers of the private schools, put it where the work is needed.

The key with Public school is command and control- that is, the policy is set by public consensus, and the property taxes paid ensure that even those without children or an actual stake in the public school system can decide what’s done with their money. With Vouchers, this element is taken out of commission. The owners answer to the themselves and their customers first, unless regulation is brought into the mix. But then, doesn’t that start to defeat the purpose of taking the private school direction.

You fellows can push panaceas in education. Just be prepared to be disappointed.

Matt, welcome to WatchBlog. Good to have some fresh prespective to tear apart for fallacious presumptions, conclusions, and failure to appreciate the complexity of a difficult social issue, common among many conservatives.

First, let’s begin with your implied conclusion that public schools are not as good as private schools. Fact is, a majority of America’s public schools are doing very adequate jobs of preparing young people for college and/or the job market.

Fact is there have been some absolutely horrible charter school failures as well as public school failures (Texas and Illinois have been home to some of the failures).

The reasons some schools fail students statistically in far greater numbers than other schools are very diverse with wide ranging causes. Some schools fail due to the culture surrounding the school and home behavior modeling or lack thereof. Changing that culture and home behavior modeling is something vouchers and charter schools can only partly address at best and utterly fail to address in other circumstances.

Some schools truly do lack money. Many rural schools and many inner city schools whose physical infrastructure is falling apart and failing to provide safe, comfortable, and educationally conducive environments is another reason some schools fail. There is a rich body of environmental psychology research that repeatedly demonstrates the negative learning effects of a poor physical environment, like graffiti ridden walls, lack of temperature and humidity controls, and of course overcrowding. Some failing schools would produce much better results if environmental infrastructure could be repaired and maintained - and that would require money. A poor environment speaks directly to students, and it says they are not worth what other students in other areas are worth. Not very conducive to learning in general.

I have to laugh everytime a conservative brings up competitive market defense for charter schools and vouchers - because when queried, many of these same conservatives often will deny paying teachers more which, according to competitive market forces, would draw better caliber teachers which would increase learning results. Truly laughable in light of the hypocrisy. I see you committed this same conservative hypocrisy in your article. Lauding private schools on the one hand, but, denying more money would have any effect. But, I am pretty sure you would argue for the golden parachutes acting as an “invisible hand” elevating the best personnel overall to CEO positions of corporations.

A major fallacy of your argument is the tradition argument. Do you know what the key element of tradition is? I will tell you - the key element of tradition is success. Traditions don’t become traditions if they fail. The fact is, the public school systems did provide Americans the very best educational system in the world in the last century, starting with innovations in the 1930’s and advancing curriculums and educational levels through the early 1980’s, producing during those years, the best work force and entrepreneurial class in the world.

One of the most pandemic problems facing American schools today is this one size fits all legislation which seeks to force all schools into a common successful model. Such a real life productive model does not exist. There is nothing wrong with minimum standards for all schools, public or private. But, failure is built in to any solution that seeks a model which predicts x number of dollars or x number of teachers per student ratio, or x number of students per classroom will work for all schools. It won’t.

Such prescriptions fail to take into account the vastly differing needs of individual school variables, like local culture, local adult educational level, local adult expectations, local tax base vs. average household income per student, and depth of influence of criminal and black market influences and incentives to students.

There is a place for private schools, and there always has been, for those who can afford them. One form of school often overlooked is REFORM SCHOOL. America needs to reinstate the concept of reform schools in a big way. Students whose performance or behavior impedes the learning of other students in the classroom and school, need to be removed to a more disciplined, tailored, and secure school environment. Vouchers would be a very appropriate use to underwrite such reform schools. The benefit to regular public schools performance ratings would be significant without putting one more dime into them.

There is a place for vouchers where such vouchers are geared to individual student’s needs. But, private schools and vouchers are no panacea for the challenges facing American education. And to the extent that vouchers and charter schools pull funding from public schools, greater problems will be created than solved, in general.

A corporation which has security problems which affect worker productivity, will quickly put in place the kind of security necessary to bring productivity back to optimal levels. This is an investment in the corp’.s bottom line. Some of America’s schools face just this same scenario. The solution is obvious, fund the security that is needed to be installed without taking money away from any of the other educationally conducive programs and infrastructure and compensations needed to keep educational results optimal.

But, this requires a very intensive individual school, and even individual student evaluation process, which specify the less than optimal conditions required to meet minimum standards. This is the kind approach states should be taking. This is the kind of approach the federal government should be taking in a coordination of information and dissemination role.

Yet, we see an almost complete lack of this kind of approach, or at best, hostile resistance to this kind of individual school and student approach, because it means allocating resources to where they are needed, instead of a one resource allocation argument for all students in a school district, county, or state, so popular among politicians, school boards, local and state level.

The No Child Left Behind concept was brilliant. Its very title implies that any student left behind will now get the resources needed to insure their success. But, implementation went in the exact opposite direction. Instead of spending more resources on the students who need them, the implementation actually removes resources from students who were succeeding and allocates them to students who were failing. That is a recipe for disaster in our educational system.

What is needed is providing the extra resources to those students who need them, while maintaining the existing resources allocated already successful students, schools, and systems. Vouchers and charter schools as implemented in most places in the country do not meet that standard or objective at all.

In the school disctict I live in, the Superintendent only scored 50% on the mandatory state tests in math. What kind of message does that send to parents, children, actually everybody? It is appalling that someone who makes $91k a year cannot do better than that. Then to dumb-down, she thinks that it would be better for the standards to be lowered so that the requirement would be to pass IRS math. WHAT?? This is a person who is supposed to be a learned individual. It does get worse, but I won’t go there today.

tom, your school district example begs the question: why do the school board and the taxpayers retain this superintendant?

Matt,

“In corporate America, when a company is faced with competition so sharp as to endanger the company’s market share, one of two events occur. Either the company hunkers down and accepts their tiny and dwindling market share, or the company looks long at hard at itself, retools, re-brands and re-emerges as a stronger, more viable company than before.”

You forgot the dreaded third option, the hostile take-over.

Seriously, as the product of private schooling in the fifties and sixties, maybe there is some perspective that I might add.

First let me say that both of the private schools I attended were Catholic, and both of my parents worked very hard to put four children through private school. We weren’t rich by any means, my father worked days and my mother worked nights and worked one day a week as the school nurse to support us.
Yes, I got a great education. The major difference was that both of the schools demanded parental involvement. That and class sizes were extremely small, no more than 20 -25 students per class. The high school I attended had 250 boys total. The grade school had slightly less and it was co-ed. My eighth grade class had eighteen students.
Both of schools got to pick and choose their students. The same can’t be said for public schols.
How many children will fit the qualifications of a private school?
They’re not going to take just anybody, are they?
If they are what’e the point?
When the class sizes start to rise and the grade point average starts to drop, where then, will we send our children?
Are these schools going to be for profit?
Who is watching the bottom line?
Are these schools going to be religion based?
Sorry I am not going to pay for that. You want your children to go to a religious school you can pay for that yourself.

The idea of vouchers for everybody is dumb as a post.
There will be rich folks that will send their kids to exclusive schools, and those that get left behind will be pretty much in the same boat that they are now, except that we will then be paying for two school systems insted of one.

I have access to Corporate Investments inside the US. There was a competition for Honda to build a Factory in either the US or Canada. Honda chose Canada. Here are their reasons:

“The factory will cost $800 million to build, with the federal and provincial governments kicking in $125 million of that to help cover research, training and infrastructure costs.

Several U.S. states were reportedly prepared to offer more than double that amount of subsidy. But Fedchun said much of that extra money would have been eaten away by higher training costs than are necessary for the Woodstock project.

He said Nissan and Honda have encountered difficulties getting new plants up to full production in recent years in Mississippi and Alabama due to an untrained - and often illiterate - workforce. In Alabama, trainers had to use “pictorials” to teach some illiterate workers how to use high-tech plant equipment.

“The educational level and the skill level of the people down there is so much lower than it is in Ontario,” Fedchun said.”

But wait… There’s more…

“In addition to lower training costs, Canadian workers are also $4 to $5 cheaper to employ partly thanks to the taxpayer-funded health-care system in Canada, said federal Industry Minister David Emmerson.

“Most people don’t think of our health-care system as being a competitive advantage,” he said.

Tanguay said Toyota’s decision on where to build its seventh North American plant was “not only about money.”

“It’s about being in the right place,” he said, noting the company can rely on the expertise of experienced Cambridge workers to help get Woodstock up and running. “

Funny eh?

Rocky made some valid points. As did Aldous. I must add one more. Public school, private school and public funded private schools aren’t the only options. Home schooling is becoming a much more reasonable choice. There are plenty of home schooling options that use mail-in or internet assignments, much like the college degrees you can get from home. Parents don’t have to be education experts and there are programs that are cheaper than traditional private schooling. I know several people who’ve gone this route with great success as measured by SAT scores and success in college, not to mention scoring high or very high on standardized tests for younger kids.

Then again, homeschooling requires parental involvement. You can’t give a child a good education if neither the child nor the parents want to partiscipate, no matter how much money you throw at them. Perhaps the solution to at least some of our education problems is trying to educate the PARENTS more about the necessary role they play. My kids’ public school is great about that. I meet with their teachers and their principle on a regular basis to discuss how to give my children the best education we can. Then again, my kids all have IEPs, which make them an exception.

I know the story Aldous is referring to very well.

Honda did everything they could to avoid saying what they actually meant—that they prefer to hire white people.

Aldous,

Are those honda and nissan plants in Canada union? What are Canada’s laws on forcing union membership on companys? Are they the same as in America? I personally don’t know.
I do know that most Japan mfg. companys refuse to build anywhere a union will be forced on them.
That is why they build mostly in right to work states.

I wonder if the resistance to a voucher system is much the same, Can the teachers union be forced on the private schools?

Very well said David. In my opinion, the two main barriers to improving education are funding and personal responsibility. Funding; the NEA and local school administrations absorb an obsene amount of available funds and that money needs to be filtered down to the teacher and the class room. Both the NEA and the school administrations are bloated and need to be seriously trimmed down, I would prefer to see a teacher make 91k a year vs. the superintendent. Personal accountability; Parents must ensure that their children are prepared to go to school and learn. That requires providing a safe enviroment, a healthy meal, a good nights rest, standards and discipline. Too often our society looks to blame others for our plight when if we really look closely, it is mainly ourselves we have to blame. If the proper funding was taken away from the NEA and the school administrators and given to the classroom and if parents were providing a child prepared to learn, public or private schools would be a non-issue.

Sanger, please refrain from resorting to racism. That serves nobody.

There are three important arguments that are mostly absent from this discussion thus far:

1) The premise that public education is failing is a fallacy — in many areas it is thriving. I attended a public school in the ’80s and ’90s that was one of the best schools in Indiana. (I make it a rule never to live in a neighborhood where I wouldn’t be willing to send my kids to public school.) So the questions are, WHERE is it failing, and WHY? For the most part, public education is failing in low-income areas where (a) tax revenues are low, (b) parents can’t afford private education, and (c) parents are too busy/absent to provide a proper base for education at home. In these areas, would private education really be an effective solution?

2) While funding private education with public funds has some merit, public funds should NEVER be used to fund religious education. Constitutional issues aside, it’s simply a Bad Idea (tm). For example, my wife comes from a small town that is mostly Catholic. Given the choice, and full public funding, about 95% of people there would send their kids to Catholic school, which would effectively shut down the public school. This would give the Baptists, Pentacostals, Methodists, Muslims, Jews, Atheists, etc. two choices — have your kids taught Catholicism, or move. The net result would be further segregation in our communities, and less diversity.

3) Public education was developed for a reason — because a community is strongest when everyone is educated, whether they can afford it or not. Since not everyone can afford private education, especially in the areas where public education is failing, public funding will be required. So we’re really talking about public education vs. publicly-funded private education. Either way, the money is coming from the same place (the tax-payers) and going to the same place (the children’s education). So what (supposedly) makes private schools more efficient than public schools? And what do we have to sacrifice to get that efficiency?

Rob, you wrote;

“So the questions are, WHERE is it failing, and WHY? For the most part, public education is failing in low-income areas where (a) tax revenues are low, (b) parents can’t afford private education, and (c) parents are too busy/absent to provide a proper base for education at home. In these areas, would private education really be an effective solution?”

In Michigan the school funding comes from sales taxes mostly. Ever school gets equal funding(aprox $6800 per student). The big innercitys get a little more(not sure why?).

You are correct that the innercity schools are failing(big time), but funding isn’t a factor in that.
Everyone also has the right to go to anyother public school in their district, but if its just pick crappy school a, b ,or c, why bother?

A true voucher system would allow those poor students that wanted to learn, to attend a good private school right next door.
Whats wrong with that?

I’m pointing out and decrying racism, Jay. The opposite of resorting to it.

tom:

In the school disctict I live in, the Superintendent only scored 50% on the mandatory state tests in math. What kind of message does that send to parents, children, actually everybody? It is appalling that someone who makes $91k a year cannot do better than that. Then to dumb-down, she thinks that it would be better for the standards to be lowered so that the requirement would be to pass IRS math. WHAT?? This is a person who is supposed to be a learned individual. It does get worse, but I won’t go there today.

Out of curiosity, how do you think you would do on those tests if you took them tomorrow without a refresher course in the subject first?

I think it’s a sad but true fact that most of us do not tend to use the majority of higher maths we learned in school, and in fact tend to forget them unless working in a specialized field which requires them. This is also true of other subjects, I think… without referring to a textbook or other source, how many here think they could diagram a sentence? It’s not really something you do as part of normal writing, even if you’re quite familiar with the parts of speech, so I think it tends to be forgotten. How many people here still speak more than a few words and phrases of the languages they took in high school? I could go on, but I’m sure I’ve made my point. We’re not machines, and we do tend to forget a great deal of what we are taught in school. Hell, this is acknowledged in school itself where there is a brief refresher period in each subject to get you back up to speed from where you were the year before after summer vacation. School textbooks are written to provide such a refresher period on the information that came before.

It kind of makes you wonder about the idea of cramming facts and figures into students heads in the name of “education”, rather than focusing more on strategies for learning and self-education, thinking logically, and even thinking outside the box.

David R. Remer
I am conducting an investigation of the Sup. This investigation will go to the AG of our state where there is an attorney to handle school matters. She also has a two year extension that a former board gave her on her contract. The present board is working to have her removed without compensation due on the extensiions. Right now the Sup considers meet her worse nightmare. I promised her more sleepless nights.

Rob
I passed all the state AIMS tests with flying colors. I am over sixty years of age. I did no special preparation for the tests. The tests are not whimped out or easy out tests. They are difficult particularly for students who are not prepared properly. Teaching in AZ has succumbed to a level of teaching to the test.

One additional note. I am seeking election to our local school board next year.

Rob
Just curious. What part of Indiana? I attended schools in St. Joseph and Elkhart counties. High School at a very small Jimtown HS in Elkhart Co.

Tom,
In your school superintendant example, is this position an elected one or appointed?

Aldous,
Your Nissan and Honda US worker training problems are even worse than you describe because the automobile manufacturing industry is one of the most highly automated and/or robotic in the world. Theoretically training equipment operation should be incredibly simple and, on a very short learning curve. The more serious problem in this environment IMO is the fact that the more technology you have, the more need to properly maintain and repair it. It is in this area that the greatest worker shortage exists.

Steve,

You are correct. the shortage is the skilled tradesmen that can keep things running. The problems come when a union demands that someone tightning bumper bolts be paid almost exactly the same wage.

Lets see…Michigan has both skilled factory workers and skilled tradesmen out of work, but any new factorys are build in southern right to work states. They would rather have an unskilled workforce that can’t read?
Or another option would be that no company can survive in a world market with a union millstone hanging around its neck?
Its just a mystery.

If you can’t control where children go to school, you can’t control what they learn.
If you can’t control what they learn, you can’t control how they think.
If you can’t control how they think, you can’t control how they vote.

Beagle,
You and I seem to be on the same page on this issue. This may be a first for me.

I am no longer in the work force. When I was I have been in the position to deal with organized labor both in right to work states and other.

While I have strong opinions regarding the value of organized labor/unions I will limit reference for fear of severe reprecussions. Unless the laws have changed, a company in a “right to work” state can still be unionized. The “right to work” comes in because the people have a choice of whether or not they wish to join the union.

The company really doesn’t care because they have to treat everyone alike whether or not they are in the union. The non-union folks wind up getting the best of both worlds without paying dues.

That said we come full circle to today. What I said above would apply to companies that already had facilities operational. Given a choice as to whether or not to build in a right to work state or not, the company is going to build in the right to work state and hope that the “anti-union” sentiment continues to prevail. If they have another facility that is unionized, it might be a problem because the union will “follow” them and attempt organization. At the very least it gives the union that already is established in the first facility the upper hand for obvious reasons.

If a company has a “sweetheart contract” with the union, issue of skilled vs non-skilled is less important. In a contract that has clauses such as seniority in years of total service and job service and due to production conditions you have to bring in a person on a less senior job and, to do so you have to bring in six other people because of the seniority thing your cost is going through the roof.

kctim-

If you can’t control where children go to school, you can’t control what they learn.
If you can’t control what they learn, you can’t control how they think.
If you can’t control how they think, you can’t control how they vote.

Control? To quote Ellie Sattler in Jurassic Park: “You never had control, that’s the illusion!”

You register this all as some liberal conspiracy, but the fact is the conservative interests in this country have been making inroads and having influence for a long time. If it’s about anybody’s control, it’s about the control of the Right. If they can get kids out of schools where overt partisanship and sectarianism in the material is prohibited, they can shape what the kids think instead of having to take their chances with an actual marketplace of idea’s approach. That’s what vouchers are about: division. It’s about dropping out of a field of competition, and playing the game where they get to make the rules without having to win over others.

Sanger, there is no basis in fact whatsoever to point to the assumption that Honda wanted to hire only white people, that is merely wild speculation on your part and again serves nothing. Your claim of decrying racism is exactly what Jesse Jackson does, and that only serves to perpetuate racism, not end it.

I want to thank everyone for the comments to my first posting here at WatchBlog. Many of you examine some of the fallacies of my argument, including the perceived belief that public education is an abject failure. On the contrary, I am a product of public education, I did not attend a private school until law school. I know that many public schools out there are doing a fine job, an excellent job and all should be commended.

However, I would like to add a couple of thoughts in response. Some have noted that I make a bad analogy between consumerism in other areas and consumerism in education that it is essentially an apples and oranges argument. I don’t think that I do. For example, the university system in America is arguably the best in the world. Why? Because there are products to fit every situation. You want a small liberal arts university in the boondocks—got lots. Need a technical university focusing on engineering. Got it. Need a big public university in thriving metropolis, step right up.

But in elementary and secondary education, these choices are not present, at least not on the scope and scale of college education. One might suggest that the state pays for elementary and secondary education. This is true, but why does that necessarily negate the concept of competition, of market forces?

Second, there is an underlying sentiment that we should not abandon public schools and that I somehow advocate that. On the contrary, I don’t think public education will ever go the way of the dinosaur, in fact I hope it does not. But the dinosaur needs to evolve.

At any rate, thanks to all for the comments, I ready them with care, and always will.

steve smith
The Sup is appointed. That is one reason why a thorough investigation of her behavior is important. For instance; she at one time recently said she does not have to abide by district policy. She has done too much wrong and the students, teachers and other empolyees and staff are suffering for it. The most important is the lack of quality in decisions affecting the students. Numbers are fudged to make it appear that tests scores are above average, but when you get to the bottom line in the methods and programs used to reach the inflated figures, you find that the test scores shown are not what they really are. I must acknowledge that the student who has the family structure, skills, talent, wherewithal, desire, and intelligence to achieve, will do so without all the garbage. But if the garbage is not there then they can achieve even more and more can achieve.

“If it’s about anybody’s control, it’s about the control of the Right”

Wrong Stephen.
Its not about either, the left or right, having any control whatsoever in our childrens education. It’s about parents having the right to decide for themselves.
Hell, if women should have a choice on whether to kill a baby or not, they sure as hell should have a choice on how that child gets its education.
I don’t want the religion taught to my children in school and I don’t want your politics forced onto my children in school either.
Whether the left likes it or not, there is no difference between teaching kids to believe in the lefts political message and how a person believes in a God.

Vouchers are no more than bribes.
The right thinks they can buy more votes by giving people money to go to good schools and the left is afraid less people will be dependent on their social programs and they will loose votes.

A couple thoughts:
1. Public schools are a product of the communities in which the schools reside. Some better than others - not coincidentally the better happen to be in more affluent areas.

2. Pleasing all the parents is impossible.

3. Yes, Home schooling works for the individuals. It is not good for society overall that more and more people are too good to be exposed to the public population.

4. Part of the motivation of the privatizers is snobbery and/or bigotry. They dont want their kids associating with the general population and they dont want to pay for a service they aren’t using.

kctim,

Correct me if I am mistaken.

You and I are in agreement on not wanting vouchers?

If folks want to send their children to private schools they should find a way to pay for it themselves.

tom,

I went to grade/high school in Speedway, Indiana, home of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

“Yes, Home schooling works for the individuals. It is not good for society overall that more and more people are too good to be exposed to the public population.”

Having a society full of dumbasses isn’t working out too well either.
I don’t know one home schooler who thinks they are too good for the public population.
But I do know plenty who love their children and know they are too important to rely on public education to ensure they succeed.

Class warfare and the race card. Tired excuses that always pop-up near elections or when there is no viable alternative to offer.

Tom G.,

“4. Part of the motivation of the privatizers is snobbery and/or bigotry. They dont want their kids associating with the general population and they dont want to pay for a service they aren’t using.”

Without coming out and saying it, you’re implying racism is behind people wanting vouchers.

I support vouchers, and if there is anything that pisses me off more that socialism and high taxes, its racism( in any form)!

I support vouchers so innercity kids that want an education, get the option to go to better schools.
I totally reject that poor minority parents dont give a shit, and that none of those students want the chance to be educated!
Some dont care, many do but have no choice.

My children went to good schools in the burbs, my only dog in this fight is that I want some of those minority kids to be allowed to transfer to better schools, even if their (loving,careing, parents can afford private school).

Don’t give me the “white flight” bs either, stop living in the 60’s. That shit is gone.

I live in “rednecksville”, not lots of minoritys, but its not from them being unwelcome.

Low be the man in my area that use anything racial towards them.
They would get the hillbilly shit knocked out of them for messing with any of the local friends and neighbors!

Could minoritys benifit from living, working, and being educated in more affulent areas?
I think so. Everyone would be better off if groups wernt isolated.(by socity or by choice).

In a perfect world(in MHO) whatever % of any ethnic group of a country or state, would be the same % in every community.
Its time to put all that crap behind us.
To live together, we must live TOGETHER.

Just my opinion.

kctim-
decide what? Parent’s don’t decide what level of education is necessary for success. Society does. Parents don’t decide what theories work, trained scientists do. Parents do decide what looks like political influence to them, and often they can confuse what’s political abhorrent to them with what’s politically motivated. It becomes hard to step back and really look at things with a non-partisan eye.

You worry too much about that. You worry about our politics as if it’s the landshark, and opening up the door means your kids get swallowed up. I’d say worry about quality rather than synchrony of beliefs. They will have to make it in a larger world, and worrying about the political content of public education just as often leads to needless handicapping of the teachers. It’s such anxieties that have made today’s schoolbooks bland beyond belief.

In terms of religion, the difference is that there is no constitutional prohibition on expressing a point of view. There is, however one, about using the government to support a religion.

Beagle,

You are correct that the innercity schools are failing(big time), but funding isn’t a factor in that. Everyone also has the right to go to anyother public school in their district, but if its just pick crappy school a, b ,or c, why bother?

A true voucher system would allow those poor students that wanted to learn, to attend a good private school right next door.
Whats wrong with that?

If done right, there’s nothing wrong with it. To do it right, you have to avoid two things:

(a) funding religious education, and
(b) creating an education double-standard.

The first is easy — simply don’t include religious schools in the voucher program. Avoiding the double-standard, however, is much more difficult…

One major reason private schools outperform public schools is “student choice” — they get to choose which studends can and can’t attend. If a student doesn’t want to learn, is a disruptive influence, has a learning disability, or can’t afford supplies (much less tuition), the private school can refuse to serve them. Public schools don’t have that option — they have to serve everyone.

Unless you remove this disparity, you will increase this double-standard in the education system. The private schools will be able to select the demographic that they serve, and refuse everyone else. They won’t have to waste money on dealing with ‘problem kids’, so they’ll be able to pay the teachers more. The best teachers will get the jobs at the problem-free private schools, leaving the worst educators to deal with the kids that need the education the most.

In short, the voucher system will be great for the middle-class family with the stay-at-home mom and the well-behaved kids, but will be a disaster for single-parent, low-income families, or any family with a learning-disabled child.

My children went to good schools in the burbs, my only dog in this fight is that I want some of those minority kids to be allowed to transfer to better schools, even if their (loving,careing, parents can afford private school).

You want “some” of them to be allowed to transfer to better schools? What about the rest of them?!

Rocky
You are right, I do not favor vouchers. But I believe a parent should only have to pay for the school their child attends.

Rob,

“You want “some” of them to be allowed to transfer to better schools? What about the rest of them?!”

Word games are childish. You knew that my meaning was “all that want to learn”, not some quota system.

Spin is for political pundants with an ajenda, not for honest debate on issues.

A quick note on religion and school.

The congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…..

It does not refer to the states only congress. If the state of anywhere were to establish that the state religion is going to be protestant, or Baptist, or Muslim, etc., that would be constitutional.

Vouchers work in different ways, depending what state and community you live in. The primary purpose of vouchers is to allow a parent to send their child to a school of choice. The voucher then becomes a tax transfer to the new school district. There are far too many schools in the rural areas of the country that could benefit. In the tri-city area that I live in there are three special education schools. There are twenty eight elementary and secondary schools. I am aware of most of the schools and their reputation. One maybe two have exceptional reputations. The balance are all equal with some give and take. The population here in the area is about 75k. About 10% of the eligible high school population in my district attend high school outside the district because of parental preference and control. Vouchers here would not even approach the snob factor or racist factor or elitist factor or poverty factor or any other factor escept parental preference and control.

Beagle,

The point is that vouchers will only help “some” of the kids. You can’t ship ALL of the minorities (or even “all that want to learn”) out of the inner city and send them all to plush suburban schools. Some kids are going to be Left Behind. If you don’t fix the local public schools, you don’t help those kids.

I believe all of you are trying to resolve this issue by re-arranging the deck chairs. Voucher, or not to voucher does not address the problem. There is plenty of money in the country’s school systems, it is the allocation of those funds that is wrong. Less money needs to go to the NEA and superintendants and more of it needs to go to the classroom and the teachers. We need to attract quality people to the teaching profession, hold them accountable and pay them accordingly. Secondly, we must recognize the elephant in the middle of the room and that is that many children are not receiving the proper care and attention they need at home to become successful. That is harsh, but it is a sad reality and I have seen it first hand. Helping children enjoy a quality environment in their formative years must always be a priority in our society.

I believe that home schooling a child should be against the law. Realizing the reprecussions of that statement, what I would settle for is strongly discouraged. Exempt of course would be the mentally and/or physically challenged.

Further, it is my opinion that every student should go to the school(s) in the district in which they reside.

“Education” involves far more than learning reading, writing and arithmetic. Education means finding out about what it takes to function in daily life. How what you think and behave fits and/or contrasts with your peers is an integral part of the learning/life process.

There is some quote about not understanding what something or someone is like unless you have walked in his shoes.

Every day, a public school student has to do something he/she does not like to do. Doing it, even failing at it is not only necessary but, a good thing.

You have to go to gym class and be less athletic than someone else. Then you have to shower and stand naked in the locker room like everyone else. Then you have to go to Algebra class and answer all the questions and ace a test and watch the guy from the locker room look like he just came from a “Lost in Space” episode.

A good athlete will almost always tell you that he/she learned far more from the other kids on the team and, from the competitive environment than he ever learned from the coach.

Many of these posts are saying a) schools in affluent neighborhoods are better than those in the less desireable ones, b) parents should have the right to send their kids to their school of choice, c) we should provide extra resources to students who need them (that implies that the “slow” student should get more help and, the “bright” kid should get more help)

We envision that left to its own devices, schools in the “bad” neighborhoods are going to turn out gangsters and kids less educated and prepared for life and, schools in “nice” neighborhoods are going to turn out model citizens. So convinced are we that we are willing to move kids around as if they were puzzle pieces to make sure that happens.

I believe that home schooling a child should be against the law. Realizing the reprecussions of that statement, what I would settle for is strongly discouraged. Exempt of course would be the mentally and/or physically challenged.

I believe that home schooling should be strongly ENCOURAGED. What better way to reduce class sizes and ensure adequate attention to the needs of each child?

Of course, I also think that parents who home-school their kids should have to meet certain minimum requirements first — perhaps the qualifications required of substitute teachers in the school district, for example.

Rob Cottrell,

I respect your opinion albeit I disagree. I know several people who home schooled their children. Some did it for religious reasons and others so that they could control/protect the child’s environment.

In all cases, the parents and kids have told me they would have preferred going to a “real” school so they could make friends and interact with others. BTW, most did not develop any extracurricular interests.

Stephen Daugherty said: If it’s about anybody’s control, it’s about the control of the Right. If they can get kids out of schools where overt partisanship and sectarianism in the material is prohibited, they can shape what the kids think instead of having to take their chances with an actual marketplace of idea’s approach.

I have to disagree. I went exclusively to public schools (not so very long ago) where I was taught:
1) Democratics care about people and education.
2) Republicans care about business and the military.

Imagine how shocking it was for me to grow up and watch the Democrat Governor of my state take away all the people-helping funding that the Republican Governor put in place.

I went to many different public schools all across the nation. The DO teach partisan pro-democrat politics in my experience. More currently, during the GWB vs. Gore election, my nephew, who’s parents were card-carrying Republicans, brought home Democrat buttons and stickers that his teacher gave him. His parents were outraged, but the school didn’t care or act against the out-of-line teacher.

If the Republicans are working to change that, they’re only evening the playing field. However, it’s parents clammoring for choice, not just political parties.

That being said: I agree cutting the administration would solve many funding issues. I think teaching children in public schools with public funds is the best option when public funds are involved. Parents who want a choice can arrange private schooling themselves. With home schooling it doesn’t HAVE to cost a lot of money, but it’ll definitely require a lot of the parents’ time.

P.S. All the home schoolers I know are VERY active extracurricularly. All of them have friends and are very social. The majority of the students themselves made the choice to be home schooled. Not one of the home schooled students I’ve talked to have complained about not having friends or understanding their peers. They are confident, caring, well-educated individuals that are happy with their schooling…right up until their parents tell them they have to do their home work before they go play.

I looked into home schooling very seriously because my family tends to live on a “night owl” schedule which strongly conflicts with the school systems’ schedule. It wasn’t until after my three (birth) children were diagnosed with developmental disabilities that I gave up on the idea of home schooling, because I know I need the help of knowledgable professionals to best educate my children. The school system provides that in abundance.

Rob,

Perhaps my ideas would’nt solve every problem for innercity children.

What is wrong with starting somewhere?
Statis quo is sucking the high hard one.
Lets come up with something that most can agree on that helps the kids that need it most.

Any voucher system should include that you must accept anyone that wants to attend.

Your turn.

steve smith, you make very good arguments for the benefits of public education, but, the argument against homeschooling is one fraught with slippery slope arguments toward a federalized educational brainwashing future.

Choice must remain available to those capable of preparing their children to meet minimum educational standards, and to those who can afford to do so in addition to supporting public schools which, should adversity strike, would be there like insurance in the event homeschooling became impractical for medical, financial or other reasons. It must remain available and legal as a defense against tyrannical governance and Orwellian or Huxlian future.

David Remer,

Good point on the home schooling.

I need to stay away from the dreaded slippery slope.

Are you guys ever going to run out of buzzwords?

We will when you will.

Steve, scratch that last comment. No, we won’t ever run out of buzz words, they are a tool of language for communication, a shorthand for larger concepts like the one I elucidated upon in my comment about homeschooling. If the buzzwords, Orwellian or Huxlian are a mystery, the titles worth reading are Animal Farm, Brave New World, and 1984. All seminal works on how any society of any type of government can become authoritarian when citizens fail their duty of vigilance and the education of history.

David,

I was being sarcastic about the buzzwords. They are everywhere and some are quite humorous.

It is far more interesting to read your posts which are a thesaurus in action.

Why would someone say elucidated when “explained clearly” is just as good?

I am familiar with George Orwell and by the way
your word “Huxlian” is spelled incorrectly. The correct two spellings used in the context that you did are 1) Huxleyan or 2) Huxleian

I assume that in your use of the word “seminal” you are not referring to the conveyance of semen but rather to creativity, originality, etc.

Steve, see how the use of language can elevate the discussion? Thank you Steve. Economy of words is important for readership attention. When writing articles I try, when I have a choice of two words or one which convey the same meaning, to choose one instead of two. Journalism 101.

Thank you for the spelling correction. I was not aware of the correct spelling.

Very good interpretation of the word seminal. Context conveys a lot about definition doesn’t it? In fact, in written media, context is everything isn’t it? Very Good!

BTW, can you recall for me please any non authoritarian society that became so through some means other than slippery slope revisions to law? I can’t think of any off the top of my head. And that was the issue of my comment which you replied to.

Are vouchers and charter schools lumped together in the legislation? While I understand they both give competition to main stream public schools, they are dissimilar on many counts. In my area we have a charter school, but it doesn’t provide a complete education even by their standards. The kids are required to go back and forth between the schools in order to take all their classes. And there are no vouchers that I know of in my city’s school district.

David,

I admire your self control. You are of course correct that one word is better than two in terms of economy of text and readership attention.

As I said I was only joking about the buzz words and the slippery slope comments.

My point about the thesaurus like commentary is really to suggest that messages that you guys want to deliver outside of Watchblog would have to be conveyed in words and terms that the general public will understand. You guys are making some very valuable points and arguments to improve government in one way or another.

You even have me tetering on the edge with some of them. What you need is public support and I don’t think you can gather enough of it by using terms and dialogue that is not at “the appropriate level” for the masses.

steve smith,

Regarding homeschooling, I’ve known several kids who are/were homeschooled. Most were done for the same reason — because the public schools are geared towards a single pace of learning, and these kids learned at either a much faster or a much slower pace.

In every case I’ve experienced, the kids were very active in church groups, Boy Scouts, etc., which kept them busy with extracurricular activities all week long.

Beagle,

Lets come up with something that most can agree on that helps the kids that need it most.

I agree. I just don’t agree that most voucher programs, in their current incarnations, help the kids that need it most. Too many of them take money away from those that need it most, and instead fund religious education for the kids that need it least.

Any voucher system should include that you must accept anyone that wants to attend.

That sounds great, but I doubt many private schools would bite. If they can’t refuse kids with drug problems (or records as drug dealers), or kick kids out who are habitually disruptive, they probably won’t want to sign on to the program.

But, if you can get them to do so, I’m all for it.

Rob Cottrell,

Your experience with the home schooling issue is obviously different than mine.

I do wonder though, do the home schooled kids (those that participate under the legal auspices of the state) have to periodically go somewhere to take a test similar to what would be given in a public school. This of course would be to see if they are learning at an acceptable pace.

Also, do the home school teachers have to be periodically interviewed and/or tested for their abilities.

I used to know these things but it has been years.

SD
“decide what?”

Where their own kids go to school.

“Parent’s don’t decide what level of education is necessary for success. Society does. Parents don’t decide what theories work, trained scientists do.”

No they don’t, but they can tell when those things aren’t being taught and should be allowed to do whats best for their own kids.

“It becomes hard to step back and really look at things with a non-partisan eye.”

But its real easy to ignore if you support that particular agenda.

“I’d say worry about quality rather than synchrony of beliefs.”

But yet you wish to deny parents the opportunity to send their kids to a school of better quality.

“In terms of religion, the difference is that there is no constitutional prohibition on expressing a point of view. There is, however one, about using the government to support a religion.”

Hmmm? BOTH are nothing more than a belief structure, so how is expressing a point of view on religion considered govt support of religion?
Expressing a point of view about either is fine, its the promoting part that is wrong.
Whether its a political party or a religion, both are nothing more than beliefs and supporting the promotion of one and not the other is being nothing more than a hypocrit.

If parents were involved in their children’s education, no matter where they got the education, the belief systems being taught in the school wouldn’t be as much of a threat to parent’s “control” of their child’s education. If you know what you’re child is learning you can sit down where appropriate and say, “Yes, evolution is a valid theory that many people believe, however we (your parents) believe in creation.” Then you explain your beliefs in detail. As much as I hold my beliefs dear, I want my children exposed to a variety of beliefs (diversity) with my husband and I as guides to help our children develop their own beliefs, which may or may not be the same as ours. Again, this all requires the parents take the time to be with their kids, something very much lacking in society.

As for inner-city and impoverished parents not having the time, it’s really a matter of priorities. It’s hard when you’re disadvantaged and have to work long hours to survive to then come home and make the time for your kids. I know and understand this. However, if these parents do NOT make the time for their kids they are going to lose them, either to drugs, gangs, recklessness or merely because parent & child really don’t know each other by the time the child is an adult. We all are granted 24 hours every day. Time is the one resource we all share. How a person chooses to spend their time can define them. If you’re child is not a high enough priority as far as your time is concerned, then your child is going to feel as if they are unimportant to you. This happens all across the country, regardless of wealth, ethnicity or location. Good schools can’t replace bad parents, but they can teach parents how to improve their parenting skills and approach.

Steve Smith, the maxim is, decide who your target is and assess their reading level, and write to that level. And as you point out, that is very sound advice, up to a point.

The flip side is, that our culture in so many ways writes down to people and provides so many choices of reading and listening levels for information, that we hear the phrase “dumbing of America” bandied about quite a bit.

Politics is not an 8th grade subject. Politics is complicated, sophisticated human behavior covering the range of personal and psychological to the social and statistical. I graduated college having studied psychology and philosophy, and still, to this very day, (well yesterday, in fact) have to look up the meaning of certain words that are used here at WatchBlog, or check the meanings of words I use, to insure their relevance.

The issue you raise, is an extremely important one. If politics is so complicated and sophisticated to comprehend, how can a democracy which depends upon informed consent survive if the voters lack the capacity to comprehend some of its most basic, yet complicated and sophisticated principles as laid out in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights, let alone all of the law that has flowed from it?

I think voting behavior reflects this shying away from complexity and sophistry by the parties and pundits too sophisticated to be grasped by as many as 60% of the population. Is this a good thing or bad. I don’t want folks ignorant of the issues to be voting on the one hand, while on the other hand, running the country on opinions of only 40 to 50% of the eligible voters, means running the country on the views expressed by only 20 to 25% of the people. It is hard to call that a viable democracy.

Personally, I would prefer folks go to the dictionary rather than shy away from the voting booth. But, I have to leave it to others to come up with the best ways to motivate them to do so. I have however, reached the conclusion that America’s survivability as a great nation depends directly on the education of its voters, and education in America is in trouble.

When Americans cannot discern the difference between empirically observable and replicable data from religious faith, for its school curriculums then, yes, America is facing an uphill battle to retain its great nation status and free society.

David Remer said: When Americans cannot discern the difference between empirically observable and replicable data from religious faith, for its school curriculums then, yes, America is facing an uphill battle to retain its great nation status and free society.

What aspect of religious faith is taught in school curriculums (other than private religious schools which makes the bias of their content obvious and up front)? Are you objecting to Korans and Gitas in the schools or do you believe (or know of) Judeo-Christian religious content that is still in the public school systems?

Remember, to those who do not adhere to the discoveries made by scientists the science taught in the public school system is teaching a “liberal” belief system in which they do not believe. (No, I’m not such a person, I personally believe God created the observable and replicable science that runs our universe, i.e. if the Big Bang theory is valid God lit the fuse.) But there are those who believe the government is trying to brainwash their children with science and the trip to the moon was just a hoax. Not all such people are the ignoramuses the left makes them out to be.

My point is there is room for the diversity of beliefs that various Americans hold here in America. That’s what we (are supposed to) stand for. The school systems cannot teach all of them, nor should they try. It is up to the parents to disagree with the school’s teaching in the privacy of their own home on their own time. There are some very well educated, highly intelligent, sophisticated people who believe their religion over science. And vice versa. Their votes are still well-researched and as equally valid as yours, whether you agree with the conclusions they’ve reached from their research or not.

Religious faith = mindless idiocy doesn’t wash.

If that’s not what you meant, I apologize, but that’s what it sounded like you were saying.

And yes, I have a dictionary and I’m not afraid to use it.

Stephanie, all of our technology, engineering, medical advances, and natural sciences have been developed on the principles of empirical science which is replicable and observable and verifiable by all. Science permits people to learn what is predictable in the physical world and build upon or use that knowledge in reliable ways in which the results are 99.x% predictable.

Thus, modern society depends directly for its economic, trade, and entrepreneurial health upon a work force trained in science and scientific empiricism. Hence, science has been, is and should always be indispensable in school curriculum.

Creationism is NOT science, it is a belief that is nor replicatable, verifiable with the senses or technological extensions of the senses, nor is predictable in the sense that if you take 10 people from every culture in the world and read the concept to them, it would result in almost all of them to verify that it is a true and valid concept with predictable outcomes.

I don’t send my child to school to be indoctrinated in other people’s faiths, I pay my taxes to have my child educated in the areas of knowledge that have near universal acceptance as knowledge and which will prepare her for competent management of her life in this society and workforce.

I will handle teaching her faith and beliefs not universally shared and she may choose her own as she is ready to do so, since I know, that my faiths and beliefs are not shared by all taxpayers and I know I have no right to assert my beliefs and faiths on other’s children.

That is the meaning of the statement you quoted.

David,

The thing to remember about science in college;

If it moves its biology, if it stinks it chemistry, and if it doesn’t work it physics.
(just joking)
Seriously though, much is taught in physics class that can’t be duplicated because the enviormental conditions can’t be controled on a large enough scale to test the theory.

Beagle, but in physics class, there is a differentiation between laws of physics and hypothetical physics, like string theory, which has yet to be tested empirically. The laws of gravity however, are accurately predictable for such an enormous range of practical applications that they are deemed laws.

I am reminded of an analogy a philosophy professor gave us once about internal combustion engines. No person has ever been inside a piston cylinder at the moment of combustion. Therefore, some could argue that what makes the piston go up and down is flatulence of little gremlins which spontaneously appear from the gasoline when a spark is ignited and their consumption of the air intake produces explosive flatulence which expands the pressure in the cylinder and forces the piston back up the cylinder, which also incinerates that piston stroke generation of gremlins, to be replaced by the next intake of gasoline and spark.

It is a perfectly logical explanation. BUT, it is not empirically observeable or testable in anyway, shape, or form, hence it is not included in science classes or practical applications.

This is Creationism. It is a perfect logical explanation of why things exist, but, it is not empirically observeable or testable. Hence, it is not science, and cannot be classified as an alternative to science. It lacks predictive capacity with observeable and testable outcomes.

David,

I was NOT arguing that religion should be taught within the school system. (Though I will argue readily that if you’re going to exclude some religions (i.e. Judeo-Christian faiths) than none should be taught (i.e. get the Korans and the Gitas out of the public schools), because that is an example of the Government favoring one or some religions over others, which is/should be illegal.) I agree whole-heartedly that religion should be taught at home and at the church/synagogue/mosque/ect. of the family’s choice.

However, the observable and replicable science that you spoke of is not the only science taught in our school system. Examples: the Big Bang theory is just that, a theory, we can’t prove it. Also, evolution is a theory, we can prove adaptation (i.e. the white moths versus the dirty looking moths to match the buildings) but we can’t prove evolution. Those are theories that are often taught as fact in public schools. I, personally, do not object to those things being taught in the schools, because when it comes time I will teach my children other possible explanations, including other less popular scientific explanations.

However, you said:
I think voting behavior reflects this shying away from complexity and sophistry by the parties and pundits too sophisticated to be grasped by as many as 60% of the population.

Followed by:
I have however, reached the conclusion that America’s survivability as a great nation depends directly on the education of its voters, and education in America is in trouble.

And then:
When Americans cannot discern the difference between empirically observable and replicable data from religious faith, for its school curriculums then, yes, America is facing an uphill battle to retain its great nation status and free society.

Which led me to the conclusion that you were implying that religious teachings are free of “complexity and sophistry” and crippling our education system, thus threatening our democracy. In my own education the only religious education I got was in Spanish class and was about El Dio de Muerto. I was never even taught (in school) that the first Thanksgiving day they had was a religious event. As far as the school I attended was concerned they just had a lot of food and wanted to party.

In American public schools we focus way too much on breadth of knowledge and the specific knowledge to be taught, teaching facts and figures, instead of the foundation of learning. We need to teach our children the value of learning, a love for learning, and the skills to learn. In my opinion we do not do a satisfactory job teaching that. If you are trying to teach a child who doesn’t value learning, telling them they have to learn because it’s their “job” is going to get you nowhere. Throwwing more money at them is going to get you nowhere. Sending them to a “better” school is going to get you nowhere. Unless you teach the child, preferably from a young age, to really truly value learning then the child is not going to cooperate when it comes time to learn material the child is not interested in.

Arguing that science is the all-important thing to be learned in public schools has been proven ineffective. We teach science now. That doesn’t mean the kids learn it. We need to teach learning, then our future voters will be in a much better position to learn all the things they need to know to make educated decisions. Some of which they can and would do on their own time.

Stephanie said: ” Examples: the Big Bang theory is just that, a theory, we can’t prove it.”

But there is direct evidence of that theory, Stephanie, available for all who care to use red shifting measurements to observe speed and direction of stars and galaxies. That is not true of the existence of God or most of the stories in most religion’s holy scriptures. I believe in a creator, but, I have no direct evidence of the creator’s existence to show everyone else. The Big Bang theory has a very large amount of empirical evidence to support the theory which is replicatable and observable by any who care to view the evidence.

I would disagree that Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught as fact. If it were taught as fact, it would be taught as Darwin’s Laws of Evolution like the laws of gravity. And as you say, adaptation over generations is observable and replicatable in the laboratory for all to witness. Mutation is also demonstrable through a wide variety of causal factors. Put the two together, and you have a theory for how life’s diversity came to exist. That is science. And the theory of Evolution will remain good science until empirical evidence demonstrates either it is false, or that another mechanism explains diversity in better, more efficient manner. Which is another distinguishing factor of science vs. relgion. Scientific theory is always potentially refutable by new discovery and evidence. Religious belief in a deity is not. Nothing can dissuade an individual from believing in God if they choose to believe, barring forced brainwashing, perhaps.

I couldn’t agree with you more Stephanie when you said: “We need to teach our children the value of learning, a love for learning, and the skills to learn. In my opinion we do not do a satisfactory job teaching that.”

I would however disagree that money and talent won’t make a difference in a student’s learning. There was a movie made about an LA Hispanic teacher who took his rabble of failing students, and with flexibility and resources, he turned ghetto students into the highest scoring math aptitude test takers in the State. In fact, they were accused of cheating and tried to hang the cheating on the teacher. The students retook the test under state controlled supervision, and they still beat the state’s records.

Money buys talent, and talent in teachers finds motivation for students in a myriad of ways. The lower the student/teacher ratio, the more tailored a talented teacher’s instruction can become to meet the motivational needs of his differing students. Money is not THE answer. Talent is not THE answer. But, they are part of the answer along with security, nutrition, sufficient sleep, and respect at home for grades and student’s efforts.

A nation cannot insure maximum results in education for each and every potential student. But, America, can certainly do better than it is, and it is a shame we don’t invest in our educational systems with the same value we place on retirement earnings or investment yields. Because future retirement earnings and investment yields do in fact depend upon the highest possible educational results from our school systems.

One of my fervently religious Aunts loves to say, be good and God will provide. Whenever she says that, what pops into my mind and almost out of my mouth is, ‘Yeah, but being good does not guarantee that one will be wealthy nor a good provider’. That takes marketable skills that come with education. Whether that education is delivered in gangs on street corners or in schools will determine how well our society fares in the future.

David:

Money is not THE answer. Talent is not THE answer. But, they are part of the answer along with security, nutrition, sufficient sleep, and respect at home for grades and student’s efforts.

That’s a good point. Especially the one about sleep, more than most people really think. In High School, if I stayed after for an after school activity, I didn’t leave the school until 5:30pm. Probably didn’t make it home most nights until at least 6pm, possibly even 6:30 depending on which route the bus took. I had to be up by 5am the next morning, and out waiting for the bus by 6am. So to get just 8 hours of sleep, I would have had to be in bed by 9pm. That leaves me less than three hours to do homework. And *each* class was supposed to give us at least an hours worth of homework most nights. That math doesn’t work well for both sleep and school work, and that’s with just three hours of school-sponsored after school activities, and not even throwing in the idea of an actual social life or entertainment at home.

Jarandhel, thanks.

Sleep is becoming a major factor in the workplace as well. Even more so for single parents, whose numbers are rising. It affects safety at work and on the commute, it affects productivity and quality at work, and I would not be surprised at some point in the future to learn it is a factor in rising health care costs.

The French had something there with a 35 hour work week in light of their unemployment numbers. I became worried about workers with the legislation that changed overtime rules. Jury is still out, though.

David:

I can well imagine it would be a problem for adults as well. Hell, I just realized one big thing I totally didn’t take into account with regard to the numbers for how much sleep high school students can get, too: I didn’t allow any time for making and eating dinner when getting home!

I would disagree that Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught as fact. If it were taught as fact, it would be taught as Darwin’s Laws of Evolution like the laws of gravity.

While I agree with your overall argument, David, it is worth noting that the scientific community is quite inconsistent on the theory vs. law front. We teach Atomic Theory as fact (the entire field of Chemistry is based on it!), yet it’s still a theory. Meanwhile, Newton’s Laws of physics are still taught as laws, even though they have been proven incorrect (or at least incomplete).

Rob, physics is not my forte’ so it is not possible to debate your points with authority. It seems however, to me, that atomic theory must be theory, because of the nature of quantum mechanics which create events that are yet unexplainable by empirical methodology, the creation and disappearance of matter from out universe.

I am not aware of Newton’s Laws having been discredited, so I can’t debate that. Is it possible that Newton’s laws fail to account for certain astronomical phenomena? I simply am unaware of the basis for any claim that Newton’s laws are incorrect. Incomplete, would not necessarily negate his laws, would it?

David I’m not going to debate the religion/science aspect. I think we agree, just not to the same degree.

However, you said: Money buys talent, and talent in teachers finds motivation for students in a myriad of ways.

I’ve had some really great teachers that didn’t earn a whole lot, even as teachers go, and they were very talented and very caring.

I’ve also had some (relatively) highly paid teachers that had tenure…one particular teacher didn’t even teach, he merely recited the material and gave us assignments. His job was totally secure because he had tenure…and apathy. As long as he didn’t break any “rules” he kept his job. I spent the majority of the school year tutoring another student (during class time) because I could get all my assignments done in under five minutes and she couldn’t understand what he was saying at all. Money doesn’t buy talent. Money can buy talent, but it does not necessarily buy talent. Good teachers are well-educated, like children, believe in education and are willing and able to adapt to each individual classroom’s needs. There are really great poorly paid teachers out there, who should DEFINITELY be getting paid more. If earnings were determined by performance instead of seniority, our schools would be in a much better position because failing teachers couldn’t slide.

Also, I’ve had the priveledge of going to two really nice public schools that had many different opportunities for their students with different needs. That is where I was introduced to the Gifted and Talented classes and had never been more challenged in school before or since (including college). It was great. Yet there were plenty of apathetic students from both sides of the track who just didn’t care. Learning the material was not more important than what clothes they wore or who was tonguing who behind the bleachers. The kids I’m thinking of were very smart. Some had all the advantages money can buy. Some even had active parents (who were exasperated with their wayward children). The kids just didn’t care. As far as I’ve heard (though I don’t know if it’s true) such attitudes are even more prevalent in middle and high schools today.

THAT is a problem that needs to be fixed. It can be taught early on that learning is important. How exactly, I’ll leave to the educators and the scientists, but addressing that issue will go farther than any other single thing we can try.

BTW, the movie you were thinking of is Stand and Deliver. Seen it, loved it, own it. However, it doesn’t prove your point. It was about how taking the TIME to teach the kids and MOTIVATING them to learn furnished results. They didn’t just throw money at apathetic kids. They invested time, which got them motivation, they fought for resources, which got them excellent results. The time and the motivation had to come first.

No Stephanie — The Talented Teacher came first. Everything else that was needed flowed from the talented teacher. And that is the point. Talent costs money, it is a competitively bidded product in our society. Want talented, motivated teachers, offer larger salaries to bid them away from industry, and of course, peg those salaries to results in the same way industry does, well, often, anyway.

Stephanie said: “I’ve had some really great teachers that didn’t earn a whole lot, even as teachers go, and they were very talented and very caring.”

That is undoubtedly true, Stephanie. I had some talented teachers too. But, they were entry level teachers full of vim and vinegar, and of course talent. Not one that I am aware, stayed in teaching more than 6 years. My wife is a teacher. And she is damn good. She makes $70,000 a year as an insurance claims instructor for one of the largest insurance companies in America.

It would take a nearly competitive salary to draw her to public education, and perhaps even a bit more. At her current job, if a student threatens or harasses her, they are fired. A huge benefit she can’t get at many public schools - security.

P.S. security costs money. Money, money, money. In education it is downplayed far too much to ever improve our system across the country.

“If earnings were determined by performance instead of seniority, our schools would be in a much better position because failing teachers couldn’t slide.”

Stephanie, how are you going to get good teachers to replace the poorer ones if merit and performance are installed instead of tenure? Competitive salary is the only way in the marketplace, or other competitive benefits. Security at your job site is one often overlooked. There were a huge number of attacks on school teachers last year. Security is a benefit that should be addressed first, and would benefit both students and teachers.

The BEST teacher I had ever had taught for at least fifteen years by the time I found my way into her classroom. She taught me for three years straight (then I moved away). I was her student in her classroom for only one of those years. She did not continue to teach me for fiscal reasons, she did so because she believed in what’s she’s doing. I’m sorry your wife does not feel the children of this society are worth the cut in pay, but that is her decision. Others make different descisions than your wife has. Part of the problem with teachers (and politicians) is our society has lost the meaning of public service. Did Laura Ingalls become a teacher for the wonderful pay? I don’t know, but I sincerely doubt it.

As for students attacking teachers, unless there are extenuating circumstances (which should be known and planned for ahead of time), a student who attacks a teacher (in my opinion) forfeits his/her right to an education. Send them to boot camp if you have to educate them at all, but take them out of regular public schools definitely.

David said:

No Stephanie — The Talented Teacher came first. Everything else that was needed flowed from the talented teacher.

I’ll have to watch the movie again, but I doubt the teacher in Stand and Deliver, and more importantly the teacher who actually accomplished this, did so for the money. I doubt he was a highly paid teacher, but I could be wrong.

Maybe I’m a fool because I actually expect people to care because they CARE, not because they get paid to care. It’s been said before and will be said again. Yet, I still do CARE.

We will never have students that want to learn until we have parents that make an effort to help their children aquire learning skills at an early age.
An education has to be made more important than what clothes you wear or who your friends are.

While lax teachers haven’t helped, the blame for this problem lies with the parents.

Rocky, I agree completely.

Laura Ingalls became a teacher to put her sister through a special school for the blind. She said that she would rather die than be a teacher but she did it to help a sister that she loved and was still a successful teacher. I imagine she figured the children should not suffer educationally just because she hated her job and had no aptitude for it.