"indignant over question"

[Openmind]

What do you mean I don't always succeed?!



Well thank you, I must say despite errant positions at times I enjoy debating with you as well.

That is all this country really needs, a mutual respect among our leaders so that things can actually get done.

It is like Reagan (I think) said. There are a few core beliefs that you cannot waiver from, everything else is negotiable.

Yep. . .that would be great!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes!



I think the solution is as follows:

1) Tie the funding for a child's education to the specific child.
2) That child can then pick/choose where they want to attend school
3) This forces schools to offer good education and compete for the best teachers.
4) In theory, education in this nation then gets better.

do you take into account that some students need more help then others? thus would they get extra funding to go school to school? Also does this not create a incentive for a school to only take the best students...to make there scored higher...to bring in more kids...rather then help kids who may be behind or at a disadvantage? The best schools can't hold all students...someone will have to not get there pick....and it will be the ones who need it most....in theory

 

[dahermit]

As I understand it, this system is in place and works pretty well in parts of Europe. I will try to find more details on the subject to post.

The one big difference between Europe ( and successful American vs. failed public schools), is discipline via parental attitudes. Therefore, any comparison studies would have to control that factor to result in a valid conclusion.

There are successful American schools just as there are failed American schools. What is not productive, is to think one has insight relative to the problem, with actually sitting in the class rooms as an adult and observing what is actually taking place and postulate "solutions".

Actual occurrence: Female student given one day "time out" as the only punishment for holding a pencil on a kid's seat which cause the kid to impale himself when he sat down. This was not the result of "g" schools, teacher unions, etc. It was the result of an inept administrator following the perceived wishes of the system of minimizing the events that would show how out of control the students are.

 

[Openmind]

The one big difference between Europe ( and successful American vs. failed public schools), is discipline via parental attitudes. Therefore, any comparison studies would have to control that factor to result in a valid conclusion.

There are successful American schools just as there are failed American schools. What is not productive, is to think one has insight relative to the problem, with actually sitting in the class rooms as an adult and observing what is actually taking place and postulate "solutions".

Actual occurrence: Female student given one day "time out" as the only punishment for holding a pencil on a kid's seat which cause the kid to impale himself when he sat down. This was not the result of "g" schools, teacher unions, etc. It was the result of an inept administrator following the perceived wishes of the system of minimizing the events that would show how out of control the students are.

One big difference between European schools and the US schools is that one, kids are expected to have discipline, and to demonstrate some respect toward teachers. . .teachers are "almost always" right in the eyes of the parents. . .contrary to "blame the teachers" here. Unfortunately, even that has decreased in Europe as well.

Another major difference is LESS HYPOCRISY! Europeans do not pretend to believe that "no kids can be left behind," and that "every kid should graduate with a high schoold degree!"

Every kid is obviously welcome (and even obliged) to go to school, however, a determination of "intellectual abilities" versus "technical" or "artistic" abilities is done at a much earlier age. Even before entering middle school, there is already a test where kids compete against every kid in the whole huge district (it was about 900 kids when I took it).

Then, in middle school already, kids have a choice (based on demonstrated abilities) between about 5 or 6 different tracts. . from very highly academic, to more basic. If a kid cannot follow the work (even in elementary school), he/she is not automatically passed to the next grade, but is held back. . .even twice if necessary. It is not unusual (probably about 10% of kids are held back at leats once), so it isn't as stygmatizing.

Another test is done at the end for the 3 years of middle school and at that time, the least academicly inclined kids are given a choice between several "apprenticeship" type of opportunities, which consist of some easier academics, and on the job training (i.e., carpentry, hair dressing, plumbing, mechanic). Other kids with more academic abilities are divided further toward 3 years technical schools, or 3 years academic schools. . .

Only the two or three top academic selections will lead automatically to college. However, kids are not entirely penalized for "late blooming" or for delayed intellectual development, and an "entrance" exam to college can be taken by ANY kid, but must be successful before allowing a kid to enter college or "schools of higher learning."

Basically, a kid who has no interest in college, doesn't have to waste his/her etime until he/she is 18 taking under water basket weaving classes, but can take functional classes that will assure that he/she will come out of high school with a trade which will allow him/her to get into the work force immediately with a fully developped skill.

The top 3 or 4 "academic" paths in high school prepare kids A LOT better than our regular high school for college. In fact, any European kid who finished high school is admitted immediately into the second year of college in US universities, and high school kids from the US who have successfully completed one year or more of high school in Europe are also given college credit in the US.

I entered the university in the US after being out of school (in Europe) for 25 years. . .I had no college in Europe, and yet I was able to not only compete but get a 3.9 point average, carrying a double major, and graduating in 4 years. NOT because I'm smart, but because I had an excellent preparation and study habits. . .and I was motivated as a "re-entry" student.

 

[BigRob]

The one big difference between Europe ( and successful American vs. failed public schools), is discipline via parental attitudes. Therefore, any comparison studies would have to control that factor to result in a valid conclusion.

There are successful American schools just as there are failed American schools. What is not productive, is to think one has insight relative to the problem, with actually sitting in the class rooms as an adult and observing what is actually taking place and postulate "solutions".

One does not have to "sit in a classroom as an adult" to come up with ideas on how to fix a clearly broken system.

Actual occurrence: Female student given one day "time out" as the only punishment for holding a pencil on a kid's seat which cause the kid to impale himself when he sat down. This was not the result of "g" schools, teacher unions, etc. It was the result of an inept administrator following the perceived wishes of the system of minimizing the events that would show how out of control the students are.

Then what good is it to keep throwing money at the problem?

 

[ProudLefty]

Did I blame the teachers in my post? You might consider taking a elementary course in reading and comprehension.

I know many lefties are taught the tactic you just employed. It is tired and worn. It is an effort at keeping the status quo of failing schools, but increasing teacher union dues to help fund the Socialist Party (Dems).

Try another.

Your exact words were "the stinking teachers unions". Who would that be, if not the teachers and the teachers unions?

My guess is that my reading skills are just fine.

 

[dahermit]

One does not have to "sit in a classroom as an adult" to come up with ideas on how to fix a clearly broken system.

Just as one does not have to go to school to become a doctor. One can just sit at home and "come up with ideas on how to fix" cancer, tuberculoses, etc. It makes as much sense. You have to observe and learn about the problem in order not to make foolish assumptions on causes (teacher's unions, government influence, "bad teachers" etc.), before you are likely to come up with an effective solution.

Then what good is it to keep throwing money at the problem?

Straw-man solution. Where in the hell did I say to throw money at the problem?

 

[BigRob]

Just as one does not have to go to school to become a doctor. One can just sit at home and "come up with ideas on how to fix" cancer, tuberculoses, etc. It makes as much sense. You have to observe and learn about the problem in order not to make foolish assumptions on causes (teacher's unions, government influence, "bad teachers" etc.), before you are likely to come up with an effective solution.

So in your mind it is only possible to observe and learn about a problem sitting in the actual room? That seems to imply all classroom learning is really pointless and you only ever learn anything by doing.

Straw-man solution. Where in the hell did I say to throw money at the problem?

I never said you did. But that seems to be a rallying cry for Democrats, and I am simply asking if you think that would do any good or not?

 

[dahermit]

So in your mind it is only possible to observe and learn about a problem sitting in the actual room? That seems to imply all classroom learning is really pointless and you only ever learn anything by doing.

Falling for your baiting, no, pedagogical methods include both classroom and hands on practice. However, sitting on one's ass while contemplating which ideological platitude one is going to evoke instead of researching the problem is not likely to have a positive effect upon the problem.

I never said you did. But that seems to be a rallying cry for Democrats, and I am simply asking if you think that would do any good or not?

You said: "Then what good is it to keep throwing money at the problem?" You were not asking, How disingenuous. you were stating something as if it were a fact. If that is not a straw man argument, I will eat my dirty underwear.

Or, is it, "a rallying cry for Republicans", ie., keep throwing money at the problem.

 

[BigRob]

Falling for your baiting, no, pedagogical methods include both classroom and hands on practice. However, sitting on one's ass while contemplating which ideological platitude one is going to evoke instead of researching the problem is not likely to have a positive effect upon the problem.

I don't see why a solution you have yet to speak against simply counts as an ideological platitude.

You said: "Then what good is it to keep throwing money at the problem?" You were not asking, How disingenuous. you were stating something as if it were a fact. If that is not a straw man argument, I will eat my dirty underwear.

Or, is it, "a rallying cry for Republicans", ie., keep throwing money at the problem.

I just told you what I meant by the statement. Take from it whatever you want to though.