Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everything has a price on it. Needs are infinite and resources are limited. The idea that people who question education costs don't care about the kids is a red herring. Not every dollar spent brings the same benefit, and we need to scrutinize our spending in order to get the best value for every dollar spent. The idea that education spending shouldn't be questioned because it's 'for the kids' is teacher's union propaganda.
We've steeply increased spending per student, even accounting for inflation, without any real results. Why should we sign a blank check?
I agree with you on the idea that education spending shouldn't be questioned because it's for the kids is teacher's union propaganda. But, we are still talking about being competitive, doing what ever it takes so that we can have a LITERATE and COMPENTENT workforce, and from what we are seeing either our corporations like outsourcing to other nations for the cheap labor or we really don't have enough bright students who are educated to do certain jobs, especially in the medical, engineering, and science fields.
I agree with you on the idea that education spending shouldn't be questioned because it's for the kids is teacher's union propaganda. But, we are still talking about being competitive, doing what ever it takes so that we can have a LITERATE and COMPENTENT workforce, and from what we are seeing either our corporations like outsourcing to other nations for the cheap labor or we really don't have enough bright students who are educated to do certain jobs, especially in the medical, engineering, and science fields.
I understand the problem, but it's more cultural than financial. I don't believe we can improve education by spending more money. What we need is a stronger family structure, and parents who are allies, not adversaries, of their child's school, and who instill an interest in learning in their children.
Without that, all the money in the world doesn't matter.
Absolutely, less. People have the erroneous idea that the more money you put into the school system, the smarter and better-performing the kids will be on standardized tests. This idea was so prevalent decades ago that the Federal Government decided to fund a definitive study that proved the point. Unfortunately, it proved the opposite: that as long as localities provide a basic school that is comfortable enough to sit in (not freezing or 100 degrees), student results depended on only one thing: the socioeconomic class of the parents.
Sorry, but the 400% more money we spend now, compared to what we spent per child when I was in the public school system, did nothing but tax the elderly (and others on hard times) out of their homes.
What is the price of education-go visit any slum, ghetto, whatever you want to call it and THAT is the price of education. Would you rather spend the money on producing productive members of society for 12 years or would you rather pay for welfare for 50+ years .
What is the price of education-go visit any slum, ghetto, whatever you want to call it and THAT is the price of education. Would you rather spend the money on producing productive members of society for 12 years or would you rather pay for welfare for 50+ years .
That's a false choice. More money for education will not solve the cultural problems that exist in those places. If it would, we'd have solved those problems long ago.
I ask this question because there are some who think that the money that we are spending on educating our students is too much or too expensive. These are some of the same people who ask the same question in regard to the sky rocketing cost of medical insurance. Yet, they argue that we can't put a cost on medical care, but we can on educating our future generation.
Can we sacrifice our children's future when they won't be able to compete with Japan, China or European students in this global economy if we continue to reduce funding to schools simply because some think that it's too expensive. What will be the real cost as a result of increased class sizes, with a predominately aging teaching staff of mainly baby boomers and older generation x'ers who will be ready to retire in the next 5-15 years, which will result in a massive teacher shortage once our economy stablizes?
Money isn't the answer. The schools in America that have parents who care compete very well against the rest of the world.
Other nations appreciate education and respect their teachers.
That's a false choice. More money for education will not solve the cultural problems that exist in those places. If it would, we'd have solved those problems long ago.
Not if you take care of the problem correctly. We have been trying to educate the KIDS and since there is no back up at home, it doesn't work. Educating the PARENTS and maybe putting some qualifications on their welfare money that their kids must maintain a certain GPA in school might give some motivation too.
If we cut out all the spending that people here ASSUME schools waste, the above problem will only get WORSE. I think a lot of people that constantly gripe about how much money schools spend never spend any time in the schools to see what really goes on there. All of these "administrators" that they complain about don't really exist, except in their assumptions. Yes, schools have administration but if you remove those positions, their jobs fall to the teachers, taking away instruction time OR causing increases in teacher salaries to make up for the increased workload.
I challenge those that think your schools waste money all the time to go spend 2 weeks in the schools and see what really goes on in the classroom. You will change your tune pretty quickly.
What is the price of education-go visit any slum, ghetto, whatever you want to call it and THAT is the price of education. Would you rather spend the money on producing productive members of society for 12 years or would you rather pay for welfare for 50+ years .
I worked for local government in urban planning for 10 years, and I remember an important Supreme court case that we were briefed on: Does a local government have to maintain the same results in quality of public services (like schools), or is simply investing equal amounts ok? I'm pretty sure the Courts decided the latter.
I'm remembering "Cabrini Green" in Chicago, where a local ghetto was torn down and several large apartment buildings (similar to apartment buildings in predominantly white areas) were put up to house the population. Not long after, the place had become so vandalized that it was virtually destroyed, and the police refused to enter the grounds because it was a war zone and they were shot from various high apartments at if they tried to respond.
I think the idea that as long as you pour money into kids, they will be fine outstanding citizens (and conversely, if you don't, they'll be on welfare) is yet another misguided attempt to pretend that we are all exactly the same.
Not if you take care of the problem correctly. We have been trying to educate the KIDS and since there is no back up at home, it doesn't work. Educating the PARENTS and maybe putting some qualifications on their welfare money that their kids must maintain a certain GPA in school might give some motivation too.
If we cut out all the spending that people here ASSUME schools waste, the above problem will only get WORSE. I think a lot of people that constantly gripe about how much money schools spend never spend any time in the schools to see what really goes on there. All of these "administrators" that they complain about don't really exist, except in their assumptions. Yes, schools have administration but if you remove those positions, their jobs fall to the teachers, taking away instruction time OR causing increases in teacher salaries to make up for the increased workload.
I challenge those that think your schools waste money all the time to go spend 2 weeks in the schools and see what really goes on in the classroom. You will change your tune pretty quickly.
Well, the first thing we'd have to do if we truly wanted to succeed at educating the parents is to cut off all the rewards we give them for their perverse behavior, such as failing to work, failing to develop any job skills, and having children that they are unable to support or properly raise in any way. Our welfare programs have 'educated' them very well, unfortunately. The problem is that we taught them all the wrong things.
Do we have the stomach to do something truly effective? I see no sign that we do. It's not 'compassionate.' So we'll continue to warehouse them as far away from the rest of society as possible, and dump money into the problem that only makes things worse, just so we can say we're doing something.
I think that the bane of our capitalist society is putting a dollar value on EVERYTHING. The narrow minded assumption that increasing spending in schools will make schools more productive or that equal spending across schools will make them equally productive is classical engineering " 2 + 2 = 4" thinking. Conversely, making CUTS in the education sector by looking at the dollars involved instead of opportunity costs is harming our children as well. I feel that the next generation deserves better than to be written down in a budget and assigned a number.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzleman
Well, the first thing we'd have to do if we truly wanted to succeed at educating the parents is to cut off all the rewards we give them for their perverse behavior, such as failing to work, failing to develop any job skills, and having children that they are unable to support or properly raise in any way. Our welfare programs have 'educated' them very well, unfortunately. The problem is that we taught them all the wrong things.
Do we have the stomach to do something truly effective? I see no sign that we do. It's not 'compassionate.' So we'll continue to warehouse them as far away from the rest of society as possible, and dump money into the problem that only makes things worse, just so we can say we're doing something.
Adults need to be held responsible for things like this. Unfortunately, people want to take home the biggest payload for little or no effort, and this leads to catastrophic abuse of programs that are altruistic and supposed to help people who are genuinely struggling. And what kind of expample does THIS set for our children? "Hey, I can manipulate the system and get subsidized for nothing!" And if this program gets yanked? No way, that would show that the government is discriminating and does not care about poverty citizens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
