Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: FUCK No Child Left Behind!
The Fée Verte Absinthe Forum - The Oldest, Largest, Most Authoritative Absinthe Forum. > The Monkey Hole > The Newgate Calendar
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
Nymphadora
Since I can't do shit about these retard laws that Bush set in motion, I'm doing some useless bitching to get it off my chest. Let me give you a little update about the recent consequences of this law:

1. Since special education students are to be included in the regular classroom (defined as 'inclusion'), teachers are forced to 'dumb down' the subject to accomodate the spec. ed. That's right. Try teaching irony in Shakespeare to a kid with Down's Syndrome while keeping an eye on the autistic child so he doesn't bite Suzy again when he gets frustrated. While doing this, make sure you keep up with the unrealistic expectations of the gov't for everyone in the room to get a quality education.

2. The promised help in the classroom with the spec. ed. kids? Oh, sorry. We cut the budget. Again. You'll just have to do it on your own.

3. Schools who have higher scores on graduation exams get more federal funding. Sounds like a good incentive, right? When I took the grad exam: the test was timed, you had to memorize math formulas, you were not allowed to use calculators, and you had to pass ALL sections of the test in order to receive your graduation diploma.

The new grad exam rules changed in order to get said funding. The test is not timed (you can take two days or more to finish), all math formulas are included in the booklet, you may use calculators, you are required to take a calculator class that shows you how to use a calculator, and you only have to pass THREE OUT OF FIVE sections of the grad exam to get your diploma.

So, even if you can't figure out math problems with the given formula and a calculator after calculator training over an ample period of time, that is ok. You'll probably pass the ridiculously easy other areas of the test in order to graduate. The numbers of passing look good on paper for the government; that is all that matters.

4. Schools with fewer drop-outs get more federal funding. The gov't starts looking at the numbers in ninth grade. Thus, potential 'drop outs' or kids with low grades are encouraged by the counselors to drop out by the eigth grade; thus, the drop out numbers of the school won't be affected. Basically, don't encourage the kid to try to stay to get an upper grade of education. Drop out now, so our numbers will look better.

5. A law was passed this spring that all students will be enrolled in so-called 'Advance Classes' with the advanced class requirements (more novels, more assignments, etc.) It looks good to show the public that all students are taking the 'advanced class' route. Did the gov't forget that the spec. ed kids must be included? Great. The Down's Syndrome kid, who can barely write a sentence, must write a five page report comparing and contrasting Othello with Henry V . ?!

6. Results on standardized tests determine the scores that may or may not get said funding for a school. The result? Teachers are teaching the test. Deviation is strongly discouraged and will get you fired.

Basically, all above practices are contradicting each other and are causing a clusterfuck in education. The 'left behind' children are the ones encouraged to drop out before ninth grade. All that matters are the numbers and the practices put in place to achieve said numbers. The year 2012 is the deadline for 100 % rate of graduation and non-failing students. What will we be forced to do to get said 100 % in order to receive much needed funding? Secretly kill all the 'stupid' people'?

Thus, when you read in the media that graduation and grade rates are improving in U.S. schools, please remember the practices put in place to achieve these precious 'numbers'.
OCvertDe
Talking about this is just going to really piss be off.

Thankfully, you've already said everything I would have, so I don't have to.

Wow, I feel a lot better! Thanks!
hobgoblin
If it makes you feel any better (or worse) the same thing has been happening here in the UK. Special schools are being closed down as a result of this policy of 'inclusion' into the mainstream. The kids who needed this specialist help with its high adult to child ratio are now being thrown into mainstream classes with little support. They don't benefit, and the other kids around them certainly don't benefit. But hey, its cheaper and governments can pretend they are doing it all in the noble aim of 'inclusion'.

And with all the additional bad behaviour that results as result of this you are now actively discouraged from punishing children who regularly cause mayhem. A child who regularly runs amok, hits other children, kicks his teachers, and what is the 'solution'? Treat the culprit as a victim, empathise with him and bring in a therapist to work with him. And what happens to an otherwise reasonably well-behaved kid who decides he's had enough and retaliates against the culprit? You are encouraged to come down on him like a ton of bricks. Liberal, do-good, fucking hogwash!
Absomphe
Damn, it really irks me when I have no choice but to agree with Nymphadora.

It's another imminent sign of the Apocalypse, I suppose.
G&C
Indeed it is.
Donnie Darko
My wife is in the exact same situation, with the added complication of the NY Regents exams, which are now required for a diploma. As a result teachers lose literally weeks of valuable classroom time covering the subject matter of their class because they are instead forced to teach to a test. There are no new or innovative teaching techniques encouraged in NCLB, it's all about testing. Creative problem solving skills and independent thinking are given the boot in favor of rote memorization and exam taking skills. Why not just abolish the entire public education system and rename it Kaplan training?

And then there is the utter idiocy of placing special needs kids in mainstream classes, as Nymphadora mentioned, with faculty who have no training whatsoever in dealing with special needs kids. Why don't we have neurosurgeons teach auto mechanics classes while we're at it? What's ironic about the whole "mainstreaming/inclusion" thing is it's not a "Liberal" idea, it was just cooked up as a way to save money while putting a fake sensitive label on it so that the public wouldn't throw a fit. In my wife's school they can't even afford to buy paper to make photocopies, and now she's supposed to teach learning disabled kids, kids who are in 11th grade but only read and write on a 5th grade level, and kids who can't even speak English fluently yet too.

What a wonderful recipe for not leaving children behind!

It isn't even a liberal or conservative issue, it's a common sense issue. Basically it was a way for dumb politicians with bad ideas to make it look like they were doing something about something when really they're just relabeling it, making it more lucrative for standardized testing companies, and setting it up so that it has plenty of clever ways to cut funding for schools. And what's most fucktarded about the whole entire steaming pile of dog shit is that guess which schools get the most money cut? The ones that have the lowest performing kids and need the most money to get them up to speed!!! Somebody should be shot for coming up with that exactly upside-down backwards way of doing things.
dakini_painter
And I'm agreeing with Donnie. blink.gif
Le Gimp
No Child left Behind was a Clinton thing iirc…..

Still sucks.
Tibro
Well, the special school system here has traditionally been a dumping ground for Roma. Basically, a way of maintaining segregation. Add to that any kid with behavioral problems that a principal would like to eject from their mainstream school and it quickly becomes a breeding ground for the disenfranchised. But then they also have to deal with students whose special needs are purely physical. Yeah, they lose the right to an education because of their physical status. A single classroom cannot manage to deal appropriately with the educational needs of kids whose reasons for being in that classroom may be racial, behavioral or physical all at the same time. And yet there they are all together in the same room. I'm not exaggerating, the educational situation here is pathetic and glacially slow to change. One of my sons would be considered "mainstreamed" by current standards here. Thank goodness he's not in a special school.
Conte d'Ugenta
Same here in Italy, but the difference is that we got this dumb-down system running since 1970, and we never had any special school or advanced classes whatsoever. Special school would demonstrate that there are guys more capable than other, and this is something that in Italy just isn't accepted, it's discrimination. In 90's they also eliminated the possibility to be rejected at the end of the year if you didn't get the sufficiency at one subject. Now you are rejected basically only if you piss off a prof.
dakini_painter
QUOTE(Le Gimp @ Jul 10 2008, 11:48 PM) *

No Child left Behind was a Clinton thing iirc…..


That's why Bush claims it as his own.

Not that the school system has been going downhill for a long time.
OCvertDe
Did you mean "hasn't" ?
Jaded Prole
I thought the dumbing down of education was just an American thing. The implications are frightening -- I guess the entire planet is headed for another dark ages with mega-corporate feudalism as the goal.
Provenance
It's easy to complain about the program without remembering the problem. Plenty of kids were being left behind, whether because of disabilities, major or minor, or because they were poor and no one, including their teachers ever expected much from them (of course there are always great, caring teachers but they are often the exception).

Sure there are problems with NCLB but so is having high school graduates who are illiterate. Instead of just complaining, come up with a better answer. Special classes/schools for the autistic and seriously impaired -- absolutely. But what about everyone else? How do you ensure that they get a quality education?
Kirk
They could start by replacing the shop classes.

Donnie Darko
Ha.

Actually I think the best solution involves recruiting better teachers, paying teachers more, and specializing schools more so that students have some say in what they focus on. And of course special education should be funded much more, which would allow more individualized treatment than just throwing a cerebral palsy kid in with a misbehaving ADHD kid.

All of that stuff requires more money with more oversight. But nobody wants to pay higher taxes, and the government would rather give money to mismanaged banks or to wars than towards education, so good luck.

Our educational philosophy is all wrong too. People should read Mortimer Adler's "The Paidea Proposal", that's pretty much the way schools should be structured and curriculums should be carried out.
speedle
I think all teachers should be hot. That's it, just hot. evill.gif



Oh, and I'm pretty sure GW is the one who gave us this No Child Left Behind nonsense.

Nymphadora
QUOTE(Provenance @ Jul 11 2008, 06:42 AM) *

(of course there are always great, caring teachers but they are often the exception).


WRONG! It is the opposite. Why would anyone CHOOSE an occupation that is low-paying, filled with mounds of paperwork, the hassle from government regulations that they know is counter productive, and receive abuse and hostility from the very people (students) that they are trying to help?!

I haven't met a teacher YET who hasn't spent $500 or more of personal money to make sure the kids' classroom or personal needs are met.

Maybe a kid might not feel a teacher isn't caring because that teacher might have his or her caring load spread too thin. We have to give extra attention to the needy kid. Accommodate the abused or hostile kid with a chip on his shoulder. Be patient with the autistic and learning disabled. We have about 150 kids a day each requiring that their special needs be met.

Personal grooming supplies and snacks are usually kept by teachers in their desk or cabinet because a lot of kids don't have the basic supplies that many take for granted. Unfortunately, this is becoming more common. Before I went into teaching, I would hear these horrible stories and think, "Ok, maybe 1 out of 100". No, the reality is ten out of fifty, and these numbers are increasing due to uncaring or financially strapped parents.

It is estimated that 60% of U.S. teachers quit within the first five years of teaching due to mental and emotional fatigue.

By the way: I am disturbed to hear this educational stink is a global trend. I thought only the United States was the clusterfuck.
Provenance
I was wrong to say that great caring teachers are the exception. I have also known multiple teachers who spent their own money to help kids learn, and some case just to eat, when the school system short-changed them. My ill-expressed point was that too many kids get lost in the system and grossly neglected. Concern regarding systemic neglect of children is a valid point, my criticism was teachers was not.

Please accept my sincere apologies.
Nymphadora
Apology accepted. heart.gif

You are right. Kids get lost in the system. Everyone (including me) puts the blame somewhere else. Principals blame the budget. Parents blame the teachers. Teachers blame the parents.
OCvertDe
I'm more apt to blame the parents than the teachers.

Easy for me to do, not being a parent myself.

I had one really bad teacher in grade school, and since she's the only teacher that ever had any problem with me at all (along with every single boy in the class) I count her an exception to the rule. By and large, I think most teachers are just doing the best they can with what they have to work with: i.e. what the parents send off to school to be someone else's problem.
Absomphe
QUOTE(OCvertDe @ Jul 12 2008, 01:48 PM) *

I had one really bad teacher in grade school


Coulda fooled me.
OCvertDe
Did, apparently.
Absomphe
QUOTE(OCvertDe @ Jul 12 2008, 01:48 PM) *

one


Was it the teacher who told you that was the proper spelling of 'six'?
Leopold
QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 11 2008, 01:12 PM) *


Our educational philosophy is all wrong too. People should read Mortimer Adler's "The Paidea Proposal", that's pretty much the way schools should be structured and curriculums should be carried out.


You and I have way too much in common, Donnie. I'm a huge fan of Adler and his partner in crime, R. Hutchins and the U. of Chicago's old curriculum.

Hutchins' The University of Utopia on curriculum reform is brilliant. Their fight to bring Great Books to everyone at every age is inspiring stuff.

My sister teaches special ed, so I feel your pain, Nymphadora. Her rants on the Colorado educational system is something to watch.
Le Gimp
Why don't the parents who give a shit and pay attention to their kids.

in 1996 I became a single parent of two children.

Don't tell me about how difficult it is. I had a 13 year old son and a 15 year old daughter to raise on my own due to the fact that their mother was mentally disabled to the point that she was a threat to take their life. She threatened to kill our daughter.

No child left behind is bull shit.

People should wake up and take responsibly.

Fuck them all (who don't accept their responsibility).

The govt is not responsible, we are!

Wake the fuck up!
Doctor Love

Did anyone honestly expect that the involvement of the federal government in elementary education would be an improvement?

OCvertDe
QUOTE(Absomphe @ Jul 12 2008, 11:50 PM) *

QUOTE(OCvertDe @ Jul 12 2008, 01:48 PM) *

one


Was it the teacher who told you that was the proper spelling of 'six'?

What, inches? No.
Donnie Darko
QUOTE(Leopold @ Jul 13 2008, 12:06 AM) *

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 11 2008, 01:12 PM) *


Our educational philosophy is all wrong too. People should read Mortimer Adler's "The Paidea Proposal", that's pretty much the way schools should be structured and curriculums should be carried out.


You and I have way too much in common, Donnie. I'm a huge fan of Adler and his partner in crime, R. Hutchins and the U. of Chicago's old curriculum.


I went to one of Adler's schools for my last 2 years of HS (it was a public school with no admissions requirements beyond first come first serve and a mandated ethnic makeup). The people who were there who had been going there since kindergarten were so much smarter and able than I was after a lifetime of of other private and public schools, that it was a very humbling but also motivating experience.

So much educational theory is focused on this method or that method and seems to forget about the kid's ability to educate themselves. What makes Adler's approach so much more effective is that underneath all of his writing is the realization that children are already innate artists and scientists, and if you just treat them like they are competent and independently able of figuring things out, then they will happily participate in your instruction. Of course that's only half the equation, home life and upbringing can play a huge part.

Most importantly to this discussion, Adler prohibited inclusion of special needs kids into his curriculum for the simple reason that he requires teaching to the highest common denominator, and the highest common denominator is by definition different for special needs kids. I would love to see developed a modified Adler type curriculum for special needs kids, as for those without severe mental handicaps it might help them become mainstream (I'm thinking Asperger and mildly autistic or severely ADHD kids here).
Donnie Darko
QUOTE(Nymphadora @ Jul 11 2008, 04:20 PM) *


I haven't met a teacher YET who hasn't spent $500 or more of personal money to make sure the kids' classroom or personal needs are met.


My wife dropped $1200 last year. And the tax code doesn't let you write off the whole thing either.

She also on multiple occasions gave her lunch to one kid or another who wasn't being fed or whose parents gave them no $ to get food.

I don't know what the ratio of good teachers to bad teachers is, but from my personal experience bad teachers are ones who didn't choose an educational career so much as they defaulted to it out of necessity once they graduated, and they seem to have a bit of resentment about it and take it out on the kids. The good teachers are the ones who either chose it from the very beginning or are career changers who are really skilled at explaining things and commanding respect. Unfortunately tenure keeps the bad ones in place, and the shit pay and enormous demands of time and energy discourage those who would be fantastic teachers from going into education, and the support structures and attitude towards education and educators in this country discourage the good ones who are still teaching and can cause them to give up and go elsewhere (the best science teacher at my wife's school is leaving to go to med school next year, for example).
Donnie Darko
QUOTE(Doctor Love @ Jul 13 2008, 01:20 AM) *

Did anyone honestly expect that the involvement of the federal government in elementary education would be an improvement?


How surprising that a Libertarian thinks everything attached to the word "government" is bad.

Personal responsibility and having government involvement in spheres of education are not diametrically opposed. Go re-read Adam Smith and throw out your copy of Atlas Shrugged.
Kirk
Certain jobs must be done by the public sector, education is one of them.
You can't put a private, for profit entity in charge of education.
Privatization of public funds is the biggest threat this country faces.
Public money is to perform public jobs, educating children is a public job.
Donnie Darko
What's funny is that the father of Capitalism said as much. What Libertarians mean when they say "personal responsibility" is actually selfishness. What Adam Smith envisioned was an interconnected web of personal pursuit of happiness combined with public organizations, the public i.e. government part of it being a necessary safety net to prevent capital being cordoned off into the hands of the very few. How people went from his writings, which clearly advocate publicly funded education, to the anarchist realm of selfish elitism advocated by Libertarianism is beyond my comprehension.
OCvertDe
Atlas Shrugged is mostly crap.
While much of his statements are too radical even for me, there's much more thought to be provoked by reading the On The Other Hand… essays of Jim Davies.

While I'm realistic enough to admit my embrace of many Libertarian idealisms boils down to selfishness, it isn't nearly simple enough to write off the whole platform that way. There's no fine line between Libertarian and Anarchist, although they're frequently lumped together either through ignorance or simply for lack of distinctive places to put them.
That all being said, while much of the Libertarian and even Anarchist platforms appeal to me, I fail to see how they will ever actually work anywhere but in a perfect world- and we're a far cry from that. This country could really benefit from a lot more Darwinian selection and less protecting ourselves from our own stupidity; but if the Libertarian party really had valid solutions to our problems, I'd like to think they'd have accomplished a little more by now: for the most part it's still all about the donkeys and the elephants.
Doctor Love

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 13 2008, 07:24 AM) *
How surprising that a Libertarian thinks everything attached to the word "government" is bad.

Personal responsibility and having government involvement in spheres of education are not diametrically opposed. Go re-read Adam Smith and throw out your copy of Atlas Shrugged.


How about throw out your generalizations and take an objective look at what the federal government has done, or rather failed to do, when it comes to elementary education. You trash me for recognizing that the involvement of the federal government has not been positive, yet you don't provide any evidence to the contrary.

You want an example of successful government involvement in education? Look at the public universities. They compete, successfully, against private institutions, and offer a world-class education. Yet instead of learning from that model, people will allow the status quo to continue and complain about the latest "band aid" solution for the federal government that everyone knows is not going to fix the problem.

QUOTE(Kirk @ Jul 13 2008, 07:35 AM) *

Certain jobs must be done by the public sector, education is one of them.
You can't put a private, for profit entity in charge of education.
Privatization of public funds is the biggest threat this country faces.
Public money is to perform public jobs, educating children is a public job.


Some of the finest educational institutions on this planet are private. The facts fly in the face of your assertion.

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 13 2008, 07:45 AM) *
What's funny is that the father of Capitalism said as much. What Libertarians mean when they say "personal responsibility" is actually selfishness.


More generalizations. I don't think you understand libertarianism as well as you think you do. Personal responsibility need not be selfishness, in fact looking to your own abilities to solve your problems instead of looking for a handout from the Feds seems the opposite of selfishness to me.

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 13 2008, 07:45 AM) *
to the anarchist realm of selfish elitism advocated by Libertarianism


Give me a break. Libertarian ideas don't make one a selfish elitist any more than a being a government loving loudmouth would make you a communist.
Donnie Darko
I found the set off Doctor Love button.

There is nothing wrong with privatization, but there's nothing right with privatizing everything any more than there is anything right with socializing everything.

QUOTE
Personal responsibility need not be selfishness, in fact looking to your own abilities to solve your problems instead of looking for a handout from the Feds seems the opposite of selfishness to me.


Who are you talking about that is looking for a handout from the Feds? And like I said before, fed/individual is not a mutually exclusive equation. People who use their own abilities to solve problems constantly also receive "handouts" from the Feds. Ever heard of an NIH research grant? Damn those lazy no good scientists for getting government handouts and using it for potentially life-saving research!

Government/privatization isn't an either/or scenario. It's a both/and scenario.
OCvertDe
Well said.
sixela
QUOTE(Nymphadora @ Jul 10 2008, 08:12 PM) *

Secretly kill all the 'stupid' people'?

As an apocryphical story quotes De Gaulle¹: "Quite a programme".

--
De Gaulle (then president) and Pompidou crossed a crowd in May '68 and someone shouted "Mort aux cons!" (death to the cunts/arseholes) and De Gaulle is rumoured to have whispered to Pompidou "Vaste programme, cher ami".


sixela
QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 11 2008, 12:40 AM) *

Creative problem solving skills and independent thinking are given the boot

Well, with that president, what on earth would you have expected? I don't think he's even memorised the definition of "independent thinking" yet.

sixela
QUOTE(Doctor Love @ Jul 13 2008, 06:20 AM) *

Did anyone honestly expect that the involvement of the federal government in elementary education would be an improvement?

Well, our government (albeit the community one, no longer the federal one) does get involved in education, and it works darn well.

But of course, I don't expect you to accept proof by existence if you have to adjust your cognos - you seem to have much better ways to resolve cognitive dissonance.
Donnie Darko
QUOTE(OCvertDe @ Jul 13 2008, 11:47 AM) *

This country could really benefit from a lot more Darwinian selection and less protecting ourselves from our own stupidity;


No no no no no. I've said it so many times and people just don't get it. Darwinian selection describes, in one word, biological heredity. Nothing more than that. It is not a prescription for how to build a society whatsoever. Practically every prominent Zoologist and Evolutionary Biologist agrees with me. You're confusing Herbert Spencer's social construct of "Survival of the fittest" for Darwinism, the two are importantly different.

Protecting those who are perceived to be the "weaker" elements of our society is what makes us humane. Altruism is also evident in other primate societies if you must insist on modeling human society on animal societies. Of course there should be debate over the best way to protect those who are "stupid", I think many times our country goes about it the wrong way, but the underlying assumption inherit in the advocacy of mislabeled "Darwinian selection", which decrees that foolishness makes someone deserving of death, is reprehensibly callous.

If it were your child that accidentally got ahold of a friend's gun and accidentally shot himself, I think you'd be singing a different tune about needing "less protecting ourselves from our own stupidity". And what would you say if an Emergency Room doctor refused to treat your child's gunshot wound because we need more "Darwinian selection" and less protecting ourselves from stupidity? One needs to think about all the ramifications of a Herbert Spencer "Survival of the fittest" world before you go about advocating such a model.
Tibro
Many are the examples of individuals who've made great contributions to human society yet have been dismally "stupid" in other areas of their life outside the fields of their contributions.
sixela
QUOTE
This country could really benefit from a lot more Darwinian selection and less protecting ourselves from our own stupidity


And given the US is a superpower, I'd actually rather like us being protected against your collective stupidity (when the US is acting stupidly, whether it is by constructing a financial system that's a house of cards, helping mess up the climate, or mismanaging military intervention abroad).

To come back on topic, I think a good education system would probably cure some of the myopia that seems to be the source of most of this type of "bull in a china shop" syndrome.

The same kind of argument, by the way, can be made at an individual level: many times, not protecting someone from his own stupidity also tends to fail to protect others from that individual's stupidity.

And let's be fair: the fact we have a civilisation is in great part because we *do* protect people against their own stupidity, and that has been true since societies have encouraged specialisation.

We're all functional idiots in some sense, and if we weren't protected against our own stupidity in some ways, most of us would die and the remaining people would have to become hunter-gatherers again (probably to the joy of most libertarians, at least those who would survive).
OCvertDe
Woah… you and Donnie took that too literally. I probably should have clarified.

I didn't say "Darwinian selection" in reference to anything Darwin actually advocated, it was more of a joking allusion to the Darwin Awards which, although he had nothing to do with it, is how I've come to think of him. I probably should have been more specific, but I assumed "protected from our own stupidity" tagged it well enough.

Regardless, my stance (unverified though it is) on protecting us from our own stupidity regarding my hypothetical children and the neighbors gun, etc, is this: Here's your sign. I'm not disagreeing with either of you, it's all about moderation in everything. That being said, we're way beyond moderation with protection these days, primarily to keep morons from suing each other. How sad is that? What I've observed though, (thinking logically to the wrong conclusion or no) is that the more protected from our own stupidity we are the stupider we get. This overprotection is breeding the common sense right out of us. Where do you draw the line?
Donnie Darko
I'll actually agree with you that there are things in our society that overprotect us (along with others that don't protect enough), but I don't think it's necessarily about protecting us from stupidity, so much as it is there to protect companies/people from legal liability. That end of it has gotten out of hand. I think more often than not the protections instituted as a result of overly litigious people/lawyers are stupid as opposed to making people stupid, but in some instances it can make people stupid too.

For example, as a kid I was given a chemistry set by my grandfather with which you could make all sorts of crazy stuff. I didn't follow the instructions and mixed boron, sulfur and a few other things I can't remember and it literally destroyed the metal stirring spoon and ruined my parents back porch when I spilled it. It was awesome, and quite educational, but you won't see chemistry sets like that for kids here anymore. There are also numerous cool puzzle toys that have been taken off the market due to an unsupervised infant swallowing them. And then of course the ultimate dumbass insult to everyone's intelligence is the "warning extremely hot!" label on a cup of hot coffee. Litigation isn't all bad though, as there are some business entities out there that genuinely would endanger us with their products were it not for the threat of litigation, and even then some still endanger us anyway knowing that their top dollar lawyers can get them out of it.

Also, while I understand now that you've clarified that you were just referencing the Darwin Awards, which are morbidly funny, Spencer's "Survival of the Fittest" is nonetheless advocated by Libertarianism, and it's often invoked as if it were the best way to build a society because it's assumed that's how nature operates. It's not really how nature operates, and even if it were, there is no defensible reason to model a society on it.
Doctor Love

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 13 2008, 01:25 PM) *
I found the set off Doctor Love button.


Pfft, that's not set off. If you want to set me off start talking about chop.gif :)

QUOTE(Donnie Darko @ Jul 13 2008, 01:25 PM) *
There is nothing wrong with privatization, but there's nothing right with privatizing everything any more than there is anything right with socializing everything.


This is a strawman argument Donnie, I never said we should privatize everything. But when the government continues to fail in a sector that we have evidence could be better performed by the private sector, or at least in conjunction with it, why do we keep accepting federal failure?
Donnie Darko
You said you were Libertarian. What sort of public institutions do Libertarians allow? Why do they assume government failure is usually accepted? What about private failures?

Doctor Love

No, YOU said I was a Libertarian. I said I lean Libertarian on most issues, but I find many of the actual planks in the Libertarian party platform to be a bit extreme and unrealistic. So I guess you could call me a moderate with strong Libertarian sympathies.

Our federal government is out of control financially, is growing uncontrollably, and has gone way over the line in terms of what its Constitutional responsibilities are. As such, I strongly support re-examining the federal government's role in our lives, and would suggest that it concentrate on its primary responsibilities that we absolutely need it to do, and get it to do those things well, before we ask it to unnecessarily interfere in other parts of our lives which can be handled by the private sector or local governments.
Nymphadora
QUOTE(Le Gimp @ Jul 12 2008, 09:11 PM) *

Why don't the parents who give a shit and pay attention to their kids.

Fuck them all (who don't accept their responsibility).

The govt is not responsible, we are!

Wake the fuck up!


The people who are making the educational laws are not educators. For example, the Alabama legislature who are in charge of educational reform in this state were former bankers and lawyers. If the education platform would be composed of CURRENT teachers who know the inner workings of the system, I believe some progress would occur.

As for privatization of all schools:

The private school kids usually do better in performance due to mom and dad footing the bill. If you're paying money for your kid to go to school, chances are you would be more involved and concerned if Johnny or Suzy are behaving and doing well in class. However, the kids who are in public school are USUALLY the kids of parents who couldn't afford private school or couldn't homeschool their kids because they need to be at their jobs to pay bills.

The public school kids are the majority of the population. If all schools become private, some kids wouldn't get the chance of education at all. I had two kids that told me the only reason they go to school is so mom can get her welfare check. Mom doesn't see the need for education. She tells the kids, "School don't help me none". (Sorry, Six. The errors were deliberate and for characterization). So, if it was up to people like her, those kids wouldn't go at all. If the kids fail to go to school, the welfare check isn't sent home.

I teach at the base of the Appalachian Mountains. Many of these kids don't value education because the parents don't value education. The kids' motto: If working in the factory is ok for mom and dad, it is ok for me. Of course, there is nothing work with any honest, hard-working occupation. However, the kids (and the parents) don't realize the opportunity for employment beyond that will be found through education.

If all schools become 'paid-for schools', the kids of some blue-collar and white-collar workers would suffer even more.
Doctor Love

Schools are already "paid for," they are just paid for through the massively leaking sieve known as government.

I for one was not suggesting we go to a system of all private schools, just that people are given the opportunity to attend a private school in lieu of a public one if they can get in.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2018 Invision Power Services, Inc.