Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Persia

We can't cut education

376 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Wookietim

i dont care how much money the feds give education they need to get out of it, ie stop controling it.

So, somehow if schools have less money and less resources (meaning students have less resources) that will somehow make them better educated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignus Fatuus

I also ought to mention to you that the majority of educational funding comes from the state still...

Yet all states still listen to the feds for their practice. Yes most of the funding comes from the state yet the federal government still tells the states how to teach.

Not being upset over my $51,219 salary per year, yet beggining teachers with a bachelors earn under 30 thousand. Unless you have tenior or tenor "?" ... a masters degree is doom for a teacher finding another job. Counties do not want to pay teachers with a masters because they have to pay more.

Hmmmm ... better teachers with no jobs because they have learned too much??? Moronic and stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

So, somehow if schools have less money and less resources (meaning students have less resources) that will somehow make them better educated?

re read what i wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignus Fatuus

i dont care how much money the feds give education they need to get out of it, ie stop controling it.

Amen!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

re read what i wrote.

Well, then logically the more resources we take away from students will make them more successful in education... So, if we don't provide books, food, desks, chairs, whiteboards, or teachers, then they will all be educated even better, correct? Because that is the logic destination for your position on this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

Well, then logically the more resources we take away from students will make them more successful in education... So, if we don't provide books, food, desks, chairs, whiteboards, or teachers, then they will all be educated even better, correct? Because that is the logic destination for your position on this...

i wrote it wasnt about the money it was about the government controlling it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

i wrote it wasnt about the money it was about the government controlling it.

The federal govt is made up of people just like the state govt and the local city govt is. It is not made up of evil overlords that want to destroy children... And therefore the argument that "This person who is an expert in education" is somehow evil and everything that they touch is crappy but "This other person who is an expert in education" is somehow perfect based only on whether they are in federal or state govt is simply silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

The federal govt is made up of people just like the state govt and the local city govt is. It is not made up of evil overlords that want to destroy children... And therefore the argument that "This person who is an expert in education" is somehow evil and everything that they touch is crappy but "This other person who is an expert in education" is somehow perfect based only on whether they are in federal or state govt is simply silly.

yes they are, and the schools are supposed to be seperated from them. that is why they have their own school boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

yes they are, and the schools are supposed to be seperated from them. that is why they have their own school boards.

Wow. So you think of the federal govt as evil overlords that are out to destroy children... well, if you subscribe to such an insane and paranoid delusion as that, I don't think we can even attempt a discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

Wow. So you think of the federal govt as evil overlords that are out to destroy children... well, if you subscribe to such an insane and paranoid delusion as that, I don't think we can even attempt a discussion.

no but governments have agendas. school boards are only supposed to have one agenda education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignus Fatuus

So, tell me - what is your solution? Stop all funding to education? Are you arguing that taking resources away from schools will somehow magically make all kids graduate as super geniuses?

:lol: keep the funds up just with different solutions. Again what the idiots do not realize is that not all kids are going to college. Find their strengths, understand their weaknesses and develop a system which realizes what the student likes, wether they are going to college, will be an auto mechanic, one that builds a house, or maybe even a salesman.

No resources gone from our schools .. just used with common sense. We are not in a major problem with our schools, just have been terrorized by idiots who cannot connect with the average student. When these idiots go away ... we just may save our country!!! Our children are our most precious resource .. yet as of the past 2 decades we have destroyed them!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignus Fatuus

I have enjoyed the arguments in the last few threads!!! :lol:

No offense, yet having "my best" proffessor from the University of Kentucky who was one of the main advisors with KERA which started the standardized testing scheme .. and for him to teach us that by the time that the politicians changed it they did not know what it was. In mind these were the best of the best in the state. Why would politicians change one thing with the program???

Yet they did and every one of these "best of the best" were insulted by having their names on the Kentucky Educational Reform Act "KERA". That was total proof from the get go that politics are the problem with our education system. Teachers are the only proffessionals who are "told" what to do. Plain and simple.

Want education to thrive??? Get rid of the politicians and let the proffessionals do their jobs!!! Yet it seems that these "Gods" know better .. even without teaching a day in their lives, what is best for our children. I am sure that Satan is jerking off knowing how many lives it has destroyed!!!

Come on people ... politicians, politicians, politicians!!! Let us with Doctorates, Master Degrees and even first year teachers do our jobs. Do not tell us what is better!!! Politicians have no clue!!! Yet they control every teacher in this country. For crying out loud!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

when are we going to LEARN that government makes things worse not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlindMessiah

So, the only difference to the school kids is simply they go to a fancier building. The cirriculum is the same. Hopefully, just having a better building makes learning more conducive, I sure hope so. If it does, and the grades and results rise for these kids, then I suppose it is money well spent.

The curriculum needs to be completely changed. I've been tutoring a friend of mine's sister in high school math and I was reading her textbook. It's no wonder she doesn't understand it. Every subject gives one example without an answer listed. Even if you did know the answer, the problem doesn't cover every type of homework problem she receives. It doesn't even provide sufficient information to do the in-book exercises. I don't know if it's just this specific course, but if they're all like that, god help us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

The curriculum needs to be completely changed. I've been tutoring a friend of mine's sister in high school math and I was reading her textbook. It's no wonder she doesn't understand it. Every subject gives one example without an answer listed. Even if you did know the answer, the problem doesn't cover every type of homework problem she receives. It doesn't even provide sufficient information to do the in-book exercises. I don't know if it's just this specific course, but if they're all like that, god help us.

when your teaching for a test, you only need to address the problems that will be on that test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelW

no but governments have agendas. school boards are only supposed to have one agenda education.

If this is the sort of product the education system is the US produces, then I'm afraid you guys are screwed.

Daniel, there are plenty of countries world wide with state run education systems that are some of the best in the world. I hate to admit it but NZ is one of them.

World Rankings 2006

2009 PISA Rankings (PDF)

Anyway, what is to be done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

If this is the sort of product the education system is the US produces, then I'm afraid you guys are screwed.

Daniel, there are plenty of countries world wide with state run education systems that are some of the best in the world. I hate to admit it but NZ is one of them.

World Rankings 2006

2009 PISA Rankings (PDF)

Anyway, what is to be done?

if that is the product of a government run education. we can do a lot better here in the usa.

yes there are plenty of countries that run their education systems. my point is that when we were not being run by a government, our kids were the smartest on the planet now they are average at best.

average is ok if that is all we want. but we can do better.

Edited by danielost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlindMessiah

when your teaching for a test, you only need to address the problems that will be on that test.

It didn't even sufficiently teach that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Again - how is cutting spending going to give us more?

BTW : DanielLost - That insult I made to you was mean. I apologize - having a crappy day today so if I lash out it's not your fault, it's mine.

How was it not in this situation before when we don't spend as much as we do now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

So, tell me - what is your solution? Stop all funding to education? Are you arguing that taking resources away from schools will somehow magically make all kids graduate as super geniuses?

Yup, take out the system and old guards that is responsible for its failure..

And have it run by those who can do it with less and efficiently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

How was it not in this situation before when we don't spend as much as we do now?

Has it ever occurred to you and Daniel that one of the reasons why education in the US was considered better for a long while was because we didn't have a lot of competition? When we started this country we had the concept that everybody ought to be able to get at least a basic education - a rather revolutionary concept at the time when the rest of the world thought only the children of the rich ought to go to school. We had a head start in other words then. By the time we became a real world power (After WWI) the rest of the world was recovering from one world war and getting ready for a second one... and then recovering from that. But now we don't have that advantage anymore - the rest of the world is competing directly with us. It's not time to surrender and run away from trying to provide the best education we can for everyone - it's not time to take funding away from schools. It's time to open those spigots up and get ready for a world in which the US is no longer the unquestioned economic superpower of the globe. Otherwise we aren't going to be able to compete with countries that didn't shy away from investing in their future.

Edited by Wookietim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost

Has it ever occurred to you and Daniel that one of the reasons why education in the US was considered better for a long while was because we didn't have a lot of competition? When we started this country we had the concept that everybody ought to be able to get at least a basic education - a rather revolutionary concept at the time when the rest of the world thought only the children of the rich ought to go to school. We had a head start in other words then. By the time we became a real world power (After WWI) the rest of the world was recovering from one world war and getting ready for a second one... and then recovering from that. But now we don't have that advantage anymore - the rest of the world is competing directly with us. It's not time to surrender and run away from trying to provide the best education we can for everyone - it's not time to take funding away from schools. It's time to open those spigots up and get ready for a world in which the US is no longer the unquestioned economic superpower of the globe. Otherwise we aren't going to be able to compete with countries that didn't shy away from investing in their future.

not true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_education

Early Modern EraDuring the Reformation in 1524, Martin Luther advocated compulsory schooling so that all parishioners would be able to read the Bible themselves, and Strasbourgthen a free city of the Holy Roman Empirepassed accordant legislation in 1598.

In Scotland, the Reformation prompted the establishment of the first national compulsory system of education. The Education Act of 1496 had obliged the children of noblemen and freeholders to attend school, but the School Establishment Act of 1616 commanded every parish with the means to establish a school paid for by parishioners. The Parliament of Scotland confirmed this with the Education Act of 1633 and created a local land-based tax to provide the required funding. The required majority support of parishioners, however, provided a tax evasion loophole which heralded the Education Act of 1646. The turmoil of the age meant that in 1661 there was a temporary reversion to the less compulsory 1633 position. However, in 1696 a new Act re-established the compulsory provision of a school in every parish with a system of fines, sequestration and direct government implementation as a means of enforcement where required.

In Austria, mandatory primary education was introduced by Empress Maria Theresa in 1774.[3]

Prussia can claim the first modern compulsory system that was widely recognised and copied. It was introduced by decree of Frederick the Great in 1763-5[3] and was later expanded in the 19th century. This provided a working model for other states to copy; the clearest example of direct copying is probably Japan in the period of the Meiji Restoration.[4]

after reading further down the page. no one but the usa gives high school for free. next year the brits will. that is in all other countries education stops at 15 or 16. here in the usa you go till your 18 unless you drop out at 16

Edited by danielost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES

Has it ever occurred to you and Daniel that one of the reasons why education in the US was considered better for a long while was because we didn't have a lot of competition? When we started this country we had the concept that everybody ought to be able to get at least a basic education - a rather revolutionary concept at the time when the rest of the world thought only the children of the rich ought to go to school. We had a head start in other words then. By the time we became a real world power (After WWI) the rest of the world was recovering from one world war and getting ready for a second one... and then recovering from that. But now we don't have that advantage anymore - the rest of the world is competing directly with us. It's not time to surrender and run away from trying to provide the best education we can for everyone - it's not time to take funding away from schools. It's time to open those spigots up and get ready for a world in which the US is no longer the unquestioned economic superpower of the globe. Otherwise we aren't going to be able to compete with countries that didn't shy away from investing in their future.

Oh really?

You mean Japan, Germany, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Russia, Spain were poor countries not even close to us when it come to education?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

not true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_education

Early Modern EraDuring the Reformation in 1524, Martin Luther advocated compulsory schooling so that all parishioners would be able to read the Bible themselves, and Strasbourg—then a free city of the Holy Roman Empire—passed accordant legislation in 1598.

In Scotland, the Reformation prompted the establishment of the first national compulsory system of education. The Education Act of 1496 had obliged the children of noblemen and freeholders to attend school, but the School Establishment Act of 1616 commanded every parish with the means to establish a school paid for by parishioners. The Parliament of Scotland confirmed this with the Education Act of 1633 and created a local land-based tax to provide the required funding. The required majority support of parishioners, however, provided a tax evasion loophole which heralded the Education Act of 1646. The turmoil of the age meant that in 1661 there was a temporary reversion to the less compulsory 1633 position. However, in 1696 a new Act re-established the compulsory provision of a school in every parish with a system of fines, sequestration and direct government implementation as a means of enforcement where required.

In Austria, mandatory primary education was introduced by Empress Maria Theresa in 1774.[3]

Prussia can claim the first modern compulsory system that was widely recognised and copied. It was introduced by decree of Frederick the Great in 1763-5[3] and was later expanded in the 19th century. This provided a working model for other states to copy; the clearest example of direct copying is probably Japan in the period of the Meiji Restoration.[4]

And that is all great. That means that roughly 4 countries in the world were doing that. In other words, just as I said : Not a lot of competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wookietim

Oh really?

You mean Japan, Germany, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Russia, Spain were poor countries not even close to us when it come to education?

What linked all of those countries when we were ahead of them? Think about what they all had happen to them during the 1940's... Especially Great Britain, Japan, Spain, and Belgium.... Ask yourself this : If your country had been routinely bombed to near defeat by Germany or if it had a nuclear bomb dropped on it by the US if you would be able to be immediately competitive with the US (Which suffered one real attack on only one military base)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.