Message 31 of 51 (550073) 03-12-2010 1:33 PM

Reply to: Message 30 by ZenMonkey 03-12-2010 1:20 PM

It's not jsut in school - it's present throughout the entire culture. Intelligence is something to be reviled, while being an "Average Joe" or an athlete are idolized.

We have other issues in school, too, but the anti-intellectual cultural influences are a massive hurdle. Quite literally, many of the kids do not care about school at all. I don't even know what the root cause of this attitude is - we all like to blame parents, but I can say from experience that parental attitude is often insufficient to combat other influences.

School standards differ wildly from state to state, as well. I know that I learned things literally years earlier than my ex-stepdaughters did (I grew up in CT, they grew up in CA).

Efforts to improve our schools have been counterproductive in many cases. The No Child Left Behind Act was an attempt to bring the glory of the Free Market to education, with schools competing for resources and having funding cut if they didn't pass the tests. This led to teaching to the tests, rather than a comprehensive education plan and took valuable time out of the normal curriculum...and then de-funded the schools that arguably needed help the most.

Message 32 of 51 (550074) 03-12-2010 2:42 PM

Reply to: Message 16 by Percy 03-12-2010 6:37 AM

Is that a statement of fact or a suggestion that we EvC'ers should "update" the wiki page?

Message 33 of 51 (550078) 03-12-2010 3:43 PM

Reply to: Message 31 by Rahvin 03-12-2010 1:33 PM

Pretty good point here. The worst legislative act under the Bush II administration imo. My best friend's wife is a teacher at a public school, a very good one I'll add, and she told me that all they do now for these tests is to simply teach the test to the kids. So teachers spend X amount of times teaching kids the answers to a test that really doesn't teach the kids anything at all. Like you said, it's all about funding.

Also, zenmonkey...good points in your post. There isn't just one or two reasons why the public schools in America are lagging, it's a variety of reasons and unique reasons to each district. That's why I think that many more kids are being homeschooled and it doesn't have much to do with religion, although as I stated, I think that's how the movement started out.

Message 34 of 51 (550082) 03-12-2010 4:40 PM

Reply to: Message 31 by Rahvin 03-12-2010 1:33 PM

Actually, I had a different take on it. In the mid-80's, through Bill Moyers on PBS I became aware of the Christian Reconstructionist movement (see also "Democracy as Heresy". Christianity Today 31 (3), 20 February 1987, pp. 17–23) and I have kept a wary eye open since then. Around the mid-90's, our church's magazine printed an article/interview with former fundamentalist minister Skipp Porteous, a private investigator who regularly infiltrated and reported on Religious Right conventions and meetings. In that article, he presented documents showing that one of the Religious Right's goals was to destroy the public school system and replace it with Christian schools -- they had a 5-year plan which obviously didn't work -- and that school vouchers were presented to Christian Coalition followers as being a key tool towards that goal.

So when Bush unveiled his plan, I didn't see it as being the Free Market to education, but rather I saw it as an under-handed attempt to destroy public education. Punishing under-performing schools with starvation of funding is counter-productive to improving the system; it is exactly what you would want to do in order to destroy the system.

My younger son was in high school when that went into effect. And, yes, his big complaint was that the teachers had to spend most of the time teaching to the tests, which left them practically no time to learn anything. At the time I was also on talk.origins newsgroup and one member reported that his daughter's school was punished by NCLB because, unlike the other schools in the area, they provided special education programs those special ed kids' scores had brought the school's overall scores down. "No Child Left Behind"? Bullshit!

Message 36 of 51 (550114) 03-12-2010 7:18 PM

Reply to: Message 27 by Huntard 03-12-2010 10:50 AM

That, IMO, is a huge difference, almost deal breaker, between most of Europe and America. When I was in Germany, I found they also get free "college" (I put it in quotes because to them, they are just going to school=normal, but to us yanks, it's college) for "free" or at least part of the public system. Here? We are lucky if we get college. If your parents were wealthy enough to have saved up for it or pay outright, sure. Otherwise you could incur massive debt in student loans that you likely have for the rest of your life. Maybe you are a football star and get a scholarship.

Or maybe you are a middle of the road student in a working class family who does ok in school but your parents aren't rich and you aren't an athlete. No further education for you.

"On a personal note I think he's the greatest wrestler ever. He's better than Lou Thesz, Gorgeous George -- you name it."-The Hulkster on Nature Boy Ric Flair

Message 37 of 51 (550141) 03-12-2010 9:45 PM

Reply to: Message 1 by Nunquam 03-11-2010 4:51 PM

It really depends on the state, as different laws apply. In more progressive places, those interested need to follow California curriculum. Other states like (I think Texas) are a little more liberal when it comes to homeschooling.

There are pro's and con's to homeschooling (mostly "con" in my opinion). But if a family decides that they want to homeschool their kids, I think they should be free to do that provided they follow a curriculum.

I don't see how homeschooling them versus mandatory bible study with mom and dad is any different as far as the brainwashing angle is concerned. And that is perfectly legal.

Message 38 of 51 (550143) 03-12-2010 9:55 PM

Reply to: Message 36 by hooah212002 03-12-2010 7:18 PM

First of all, no, they don't go to school for free if they pay taxes. There are no free lunches in the world. Somebody always pays. Secondly, if everyone went to college and all got degrees, then what would separate the college grad from another college grad?

If too many people get a college education, then college ceases to be anything more than an extended version of high school. In which case, what's the point?

Too much emphasis is placed on college as it is and not enough emphasis on trade schools, IMO. I think it is a huge facade manufactured by the educators themselves until you receive a Masters of PhD.

In most European countries they have to join the military because of conscription laws. In the United States you can join the military if you want or opt not to. Along with that comes incentives, like having 100% of your tuition payed by taxes while you're in and receive $300,000 after you complete your tour going towards any degree you want. You also receive an E-5 housing allowance so you don't have to work full time while you get your degree.

There are other ways than having rich parents, having a sick jumpshot, or indebting yourself.

Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

Message 39 of 51 (550147) 03-12-2010 10:52 PM

Reply to: Message 22 by Huntard 03-12-2010 9:30 AM

Hi Huntard. There are other factors, but one is the NEA.

Since the 1960s, the NEA education union has gradually increased in power over education commensorate with the decline in education overall, particularly in non-right to work states.

The NEA opposes constructive reform measures such as the highly successful voucher system implemented in DC which it has managed to scrap, insures tenure to bad non-productive teachers, lowers the retirement age which prematurely eliminates highly qualified older teachers, costing more, and becomes too politically motivated etc.

Message 40 of 51 (550154) 03-13-2010 12:22 AM

Reply to: Message 38 by Hyroglyphx 03-12-2010 9:55 PM

Hmm..so long as you pay taxes, you are qualified, right? That's remarkably different than here, innit?

So sorry if I feel everyone would have access to higher education. you know, make the world smarter and all. I guess you only want a select few to hold all the knowledge, right? The elites?

Oh, so again, only the select few again. Screw everyone being overall smarter and having more knowledge.

Really? when did this change? (I was in the army). You may want to look that up again and get your facts straight.

I see again you are arguing just to argue. you got your fancy college edu-ma-cation through (I'm sure) none of the avenues you mentioned, yet you still want to play devils advocate just to do so. Right, it's so easy to get into college in the US. ROFL.

"On a personal note I think he's the greatest wrestler ever. He's better than Lou Thesz, Gorgeous George -- you name it."-The Hulkster on Nature Boy Ric Flair

Message 41 of 51 (550205) 03-13-2010 1:54 PM

Reply to: Message 40 by hooah212002 03-13-2010 12:22 AM

I was just referencing that it is not free. Whether or not you are qualified to go is a separate matter. There needs to be standards in place otherwise what is to stop you from going to their version of an ivy league school without a high school diploma?

No, I'm looking at it from a realistic standpoint. Besides, there is a huge difference between being smart and being knowledgeable.

Just think about it. You have two high school graduates side by side appearing for a job interview. Academically, what makes them more marketable? Nothing. Now imagine if everyone was college educated. It would be the same thing. Nothing would separate one from the other.

The world needs plumbers, and military personnel, and firefighters, and police officers, and janitors, etc, etc. Those don't generally require any kind of college, they just require some specialty knowledge.

Not everyone needs to go to college is my point, and if you saturate the market with college grads, then being a college grad loses its value, right?

Who said anything about a "select few?" If you personally want to go to college, then you are afforded that right. I am saying that making college compulsory is pointless and actually could have adverse effects on the market. I am saying that society places too much of an emphasis on college. It's a facade. It's not about keeping certain people out, it's about not forgetting that other options exist.

The Post 9/11 G.I. Bill, which is phasing out the Montgomery G.I. Bill. If you were in the Army during 9/11 you qualify. If not, or if you've already used your other G.I. Bill, you don't qualify.

I know it's not a handout. You have to fill out paperwork and pay a small fee to get in. Then when you go and use it you have to maintain a minimum of a C average and complete all your courses or they won't pay for the class.

quote:

---

You also receive an E-5 housing allowance so you don't have to work full time while you get your degree.

---

I'm an E-4 now and was an E-5 before, so yes I do. I got out of the military as an E-5 and came back in as an E-3 and trying to work my way back up.

Amount of tuition and fees charged, not to exceed the most expensive in-state public institution of higher education. If the tuition and fees at the school you wish to attend are higher than the most expensive in-state tuition, your school may choose to participate in the "Yellow Ribbon" program.
•
Monthly housing allowance equal to the basic allowance for housing (BAH) amount payable to E-5 with dependents, in same zip code as school*
•
Yearly books and supplies stipend of up to $1000*
•
A one-time payment of $500 may be payable to certain individuals relocating from highly rural areas.

Source

It's a sweet deal. The Dept. of Veteran's Affairs finally wised up and realized that it is next to impossible to actually use the G.I. Bill because most people have families and work full-time at their new jobs.

I've been going to school for the last 15 years and still don't have a degree to show for it. This has nothing to do with me being snooty, or whatever else you think. I'm just being practical.

I am not saying that college has no value, because it does in the appropriate avenues. I am saying that this country (and possibly the world) places too much of an emphasis on it as if you're destined to be a loser without it. It's just not true. It's a false sense of security.

Obviously if you want to be a doctor, college is appropriate. But if you want to be a mechanic, you don't need college you need a trade school. And there is nothing wrong with trade schools!

Again, if EVERYONE was a college grad then it would lose its value.

Message 42 of 51 (550211) 03-13-2010 2:39 PM

Reply to: Message 22 by Huntard 03-12-2010 9:30 AM

You've received a bunch of PC responses to why the public school system is failing, everyone is beating around the bush and not being straight forward with you. Using choice terminologies to kinda give you an idea.

But here it is, sans the PC crap:

There are 3 types of public schools in the US, with the occasional 4th type. These are: predominantly white PS, predominantly hispanic PS and predominantly black PS. Sometimes you'll have an evenly mixed school, but that's very rare.

Then there is private schools, which are mostly white or, like where my daughters go to school, very well off hispanic kids in Miami, Coral Gables to be exact (if you're familiar?). But this again is very rare to have a predominantly hispanic private school, and only a few choice cities have this.

There are NO (that I'm aware of) predominantly black private schools.

Here's how it breaks down (in most cases):

The white PS will score a lot better than the hispanic PS. But the hispanic PS will score better than the black PS. However, the ENTIRE public school system is graded as a whole. So failing hispanic schools and black schools bring down the overall test scores.

Where as with private schools, since they are for the most part predominantly white, score better than the entire public school system, by a shit load!

Also, most homeschooled kids are white, for obvious reasons. Thus the test scores are going to be better.

Why do American public schools kinda suck ass, as you asked? Because hispanic kids and black kids (due to many social reasons) do not have the same learning capacity and test scores as their white counter-part.

- Oni

Message 43 of 51 (550213) 03-13-2010 2:56 PM

Reply to: Message 42 by onifre 03-13-2010 2:39 PM

Personal information removed. --Admin

What does that mean as a result? They get less or more allocated funds?

But that wouldn't explain why schools like Columbus and Belen have high test scores.

What?!?! Of course they do. There are cultural reasons why black and hispanic students don't fair as well academically as white students. Or is that what you mean?

For instance, blacks in very poor countries like Jamaica have higher test scores than the average black-American student. So even though the Americans are more highly subsidized, it ultimately comes down to personal initiative. If the Jamaicans can do better with less, then there is an obvious cultural disparity not a racial issue.

Asians are not genetically more intelligent than anyone. Their culture simply instills a superior work ethic than failing Americans, generally speaking, of course. We're just going by averages and nothing more.

Edited by Admin, : Remove personal info.

Message 45 of 51 (550217) 03-13-2010 3:26 PM

Reply to: Message 43 by Hyroglyphx 03-13-2010 2:56 PM

Now knowing me, do you think my kids would go to a "Saint" something?

Personal information removed. Use PM, guys. --Admin

There are no funds - less or more don't play a factor in this. They get enough to survive, no matter what the government says they're doing. The reality is in the field, at the schools.

I have lots of teacher friends who work in poor schools in Hialeah, Liberty City, Homestead, etc., who have told me that for most, if not all projects, the teachers fund it out of their own pocket.

Markers, crayons, color paper, or whetever the extra thing the kid may need, they (the teachers) usually buy it. These kid's parents, for the most part, don't have the money to buy it. If you are a concerned teacher, rather than one just doing a job, you'll want these kids to get educated and will make an effort to help the best you can. Even if that means coming up with cash out of you own pocket. Its sucks that that is the case.

Well private schools score better anyway, so I don't think they score any greater than the normal private school. Some are predominantly hispanic private schools, but like I said, these are in choice cities.

Yeah that's what I mean. I said for "many social reasons," or if you like "cultural reasons" instead, I'm cool with that.

It has nothing to do wit the race itself, if that's what you thought. C'mon on hispanic myself, why would I insult me? Lol

I think they instill more pressure and shame on themselves for failing and try harder than anyone to succeed, if only to not humiliate themselves and their family. Seems like a lot of guilt too. I remember this asian girl in grade school that cried almost hysterically when she received a B instead of an A, and felt horrible about having to tell her parents.

Americans are not that fucking concerned. We are much more independent and we do things for ourselves rather than others. On average.

- Oni

Edited by Admin, : Remove personal info.