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.
And what of it? What effect does partisan politics have on the average person, regarding this issue? Whether Republican or Democrat, if your kid’s public school is deplorable and you can’t legally send him to a better one without paying a good chunk of money, party affiliation is utterly irrelevant. This crisis is so deeply rooted it cannot be changed merely through voting procedure. If it could, it would’ve been fixed long ago.
But if a person insists on seeing this issue through a political spectrum, the best he can do, with regard to the ‘Average Joe’, is see it as a ‘liberal vs. conservative’ issue. The partisan politics is at Capitol Hill, far removed from the body politic. Now the effects of legislation do affect us in many ways, of course, but the ‘Republican vs. Democrat’ battle is raging far away from where we both stand.
Whether Republican or Democrat, attempting to bring that fight into an issue like this is at best ignorant.
Starting with the people who automatically divide issues along party lines and see everything through a political spectrum, even when it can't do any good.
No, radicals on both sides have not ruined this country. Standing idly by and letting radicals take over your country --by hijacking the public school system-- does not, in any way, constitute a radical act. It is stupid, in all candor, but not radical by a long shot.
Ah, I knew there was something under the surface! Have you ever studied economics? What I’m posting below is put here with the understanding that it does relate to the issue we’re discussing and is not intended to derail the thread. Here’s a little lesson on capitalism:
(emphasis added)
The [liberal] legislation and judicial activism referenced above are both products of the failed public school system. It has happened over a very long period of time, but the two are undeniably connected. Remember, as I alluded to earlier, our schools not only produce unintelligent children but also brainwashed left-wing sycophants as well. And of course the widespread ignorance as to what capitalism is and is not is also a result of the failed school system.
But don’t take it from me; I encourage you to go research and see for yourself.
And you speak of holding teachers' accountable for the failure of their students as if it's a bad thing. Why? I'll try to put your reasoning into perspective for you further down, but I will say now that a good teacher is all that stands between a student and a wasted year of boredom and frustration.
Frankly, the best way for a student in the public school system to actually learn effectively and be prepared for life is to "win the teacher lotto" and somehow go through the whole system having had mostly good teachers. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of today's high school graduates that did not happen.
We can thank the teachers' unions for that.
Nope. Sorry, wrong again. Any person who serves in any teaching role --within our outside of academia-- occupies a leadership position. Leadership cannot succeed without integrity and accountability. One of the most basic rules of leadership is that the success of a leader is contingent on the success of his or her people. This is a well-known fact.
The assertion that accountability is strictly a corporate matter and cannot be applied to schools (or any other non-corporate institution for that matter) is pure unadulterated horsepuckey.
Would you want your community policed by cops led by a chief who could care less about their performance? What about the fire department? If your house burns down and the investigation finds the firefighters at fault due to bad training, how can you point a finger at anyone other than the guy who is ultimately responsible?
Please don't tell me that's unrealistic.
And to answer your question, I don't have children.
In other words, the teachers' unions.
When you are taught at an early age to hand over your mind and let someone else do your thinking for you, stupidity, laziness and greed come naturally.
Oh, and let's not forget: the teachers are the same way.
Oh no, I’m not falling for that one. Let me repost what you said:
You put the names of both of your referenced items in quotes, prefaced by the term “so-called.” This tells everyone who read it correctly that you’ve implied that the NCEIC and ‘A Nation at Risk’ are illegitimate products of Ronald Reagan (or more specifically, he and his administration). How is that not Reagan bashing?
This may be one thing we can agree on (although likely for different reasons).
As stated earlier in this thread, America has (and has always had) a manufacturing-based economy that was never designed to be sustained by scientists and engineers. For the longest time, Algebra was taught as a level of advanced math and not everyone had to take it. Prior to “New Math”, if you knew basic computation you were on the path to a college degree so long as you didn’t pursue a math-intensive field.
What is so terrible (and ironic) is that "New Math" not only produces largely ineffectual results, but is also holding back countless bright students whose only fault is that they lack algebraic knowledge. This is in spite of the fact that the majority of American jobs requiring a college degree do not require any Algebra whatsoever. But did you also know that "New Math" was a solution to a problem that (at the time) didn’t exist?
Early in the last century, our country received a large influx of scientists and engineers who came here as refugees from countries that persecuted them (mostly in Europe and Asia). Because of this, by the time World War II ended (and even prior to the government's granting of clemency to high-ranking Nazi scientists) the government already had a substantial source of human capital to combat the Soviet intellectual threat. Even back then, our largest pool of scientists and engineers was mostly comprised of immigrants and not American-born citizens.
How else could one explain the incredibly fast development of our aviation industry? Especially considering that the Great Depression happened at the same time our "advanced" planes were being produced. These planes served as the blueprints for the ones we fly on now. The "New Math" the government imposed on our students wasn't "new" by any means, it just came from a group of professionals who graduated from school systems outside of the United States.
Now the problem "New Math" could have possibly prevented is the lack of continuity in maintaining a steady flow of scientists and engineers. This is debatable however, because it would have meant having to successfully integrate the initiative into a system designed to meet the demands of country using a manufacturing-based economy. It's doubtful "New Math" had any promise of success, though the question of whether it could have actually worked will probably remain forever unanswered.
So with the failure of "New Math" came the expected lack of continuity in science and engineering fields. As the aforementioned refugee scientists and engineers got old and started retiring, America began its struggle to finding qualified individuals to replace them. It's been an uphill battle ever since.
That, and the fact that the government uses that same ‘statistics fraud tactic’ to try wiping as much egg off of their face as possible. It’s futile, of course, but since there’s no motivation to actually fix this problem their only alternative is to desperately try to downplay its severity.
And, in case you are wondering, the parents who sit and scratch their “anecdotal heads” as to why their children can’t solve simple problems do so because they are products of the same failed system their own child is trapped in. As you're probably aware, this problem we’re discussing spans multiple generations and has gotten worse over time.
No. Sorry, but an impatient caretaker does not a corrupt bureaucrat make.
And what a pathetic way to neglect a directive! “The burden of responsibility to work with this committee rests on my shoulders, but I won’t do it; I don't agree with them so I'll just assume the appointed members are not experts as indicated.” You know we’re in trouble when the lowest level of logic is applied by the highest officials at the department responsible for the successful running of our school system.
The Reagan Administration did its best to work with the Dept. of Education. They refused, and only after intense ‘nail pulling’ were any of the recommendations put into practice (which were very few in number). This embarrassing ordeal cannot be justified, happened for no good reason, and could have been easily prevented. End of story.
Good point, especially as to what has come out of the demise of the nuclear family in America. And yes, children today are not the children of yesteryear. They are more ill-equipped for life and ignorant than those who came before them. We have two generations who are very much lost, and the youngest one doesn't have as many good adult role models to look up to.
But still, there’s no denying it is the result of the failed school system (specifically, those behind it) and not those who merely stand by and do nothing (who, just to reiterate, are that way because of what was drilled into them by that same failed system).
This is what some analysts refer to as a ‘self-licking ice cream cone.’
Which would not be happening if it weren’t for one group of people bent on social engineering and another who let them have their way and wreak havoc. I know it’s hard, but assigning blame is a necessary part of the investigative process. In every issue --whether good or bad-- there is always a responsible party (or parties) for the end result of whatever transpired. Where assigning blame is inappropriate is in the conflict resolution stage, which comes afterwards.
I’ve found the same to be true, though we may be thinking in cross-definitions.
Finding the at-fault party when breaking down an issue such as the one we’re discussing does not constitute an “angry blame game” (if that what you’re implying). Now, those who are working to fix this fiasco shouldn’t point fingers; it would be pointless (no pun intended). And those who dissect this issue, although having to assign blame in their findings, should likewise refrain from being uncivil about it.
When the schools went downhill, what problem was there to fix?
Which can only happen after the government shuts up with its own rhetoric, gets down to business (as in, do what it should have done years ago), and actually solve this incredible crisis.
Only then can children, en masse, be educated in a realistic manner.
OMG!
While the detailed info is certainly interesting and impressive, what on earth makes people write such a thesis on an Internet forum??
What do you people do all day??
There is a difference btwn popping on to make short comments, but I never know whether to be
impressed or concerned that anyone is using sooo much time to write a novel here.
Topic? The above post included, this entire thread has been just fantastic.
This is an issue that has been bothering me and I've been following all your responses for a while.
I have been frustrated with the current state of education (and I used to teach!!)
and am grappling with some things in my own head, as far as my own kids.
Schools became worse when people stopped reading. From memory, librarian associations publish data regarding how many books people read on a yearly basis. For most of us, it's less than five. You're deceiving yourself if you think that schools are going to be getting better when in general most of us put so little emphasis on self education. When sports and socializing overwhelm the impulse for learning, when poor states are willing to pay tens of millions of dollars for elite college football teams when k-12 is crumbling, then why in the world should anyone ask why or when schools started to go downhill. It's when WE started to go downhill.....
Schools became worse when people stopped reading. From memory, librarian associations publish data regarding how many books people read on a yearly basis. For most of us, it's less than five. You're deceiving yourself if you think that schools are going to be getting better when in general most of us put so little emphasis on self education. When sports and socializing overwhelm the impulse for learning, when poor states are willing to pay tens of millions of dollars for elite college football teams when k-12 is crumbling, then why in the world should anyone ask why or when schools started to go downhill. It's when WE started to go downhill.....
A high school diploma is the new Junior High. The reality is that no decent paying job WITH A FUTURE can be had with just a high school diploma.
Z
Not true. I only have my high school diploma and have always excelled in my jobs...you know why because I was not afraid to work my butt off to move up. Examples...I started working at a bank as a teller, I then started learning about accounts, banking laws and reg's, loans etc. After a couple of years of learning and advancing I became a branch manager at the age of 24. I then wanted to do more on the operations side so I learned more regarding compliance, regulations and laws and also learned about investments...I then got a job as IRA and Account Compliance and Training.
When I got tired of banking I moved to the medical field. I started off as the medical records clerk at the place I know work. I spent about 6 months learning about HIPPA and Privacy reg's and became the Medical Records Coordinator for a 86 bed residential youth psychiatric/behavioral facility.
I did all this without a college degree. Its amazing what drive and hard work will do for someone's career.
Everyone I talk about tells me how terrible the public schools are now a days. They tell me "in their day" our public education system was much better. The kids minded their teachers, people paid attention in class and the quality of instruction was much better.
If you are a baby boomer or older, do you think the school you went to "in your day" is better than what your kids have today?
If this is the case then there must of been a glory day in America's history when schools were great. In what era was our public education system in good shape?
There are a number of complex answers, but I can give a simple one. When an education became a 'right' that other people were supposed to provide for you, rather than a responsibility of the student to perform as well as possible. Also, when parents stopped supporting schools and became an 'advocate' for their child, right or wrong.
Dazzleman, would you elaborate on the advocacy that you believe has degraded public education?
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.
Great points IMO.
